I do not think retiring rather than deploying quite as dishonorable as some others believe. It is disappointing. What is dishonorable is staying in the Guard past retirement eligibility if he had no intention of participating in a call-up. Unless there is evidence he truly improved the battalion readiness, I am skeptical. Accepting pay for military service only to afford a nicer car or vacation is somewhat dishonest.
He was eligible for retirement at year 20, and then signed up for another 4 years after 9/11. He was sent to Europe for base security duty.
The timing of his House campaign, retirement, and his former unit's deployment orders to combat duty sure sound like he planned to retire and be a Congressperson without knowledge of the pending deployment.
In the first video, "Fellow veteran speaks out...", have a look at 1:00 to 1:20. With that, and the text of the article, one can piece together a timeline...
The unit received their Warning Order for deployment, Walz talked about running for congress but stated he would deploy, then later retired.
I pretty much just lurk here now but that stolen valor crap has really pissed me off. Dude serves honorably for 24 years but republicans just don't care if you happen to be a democrat. It's just gross and highlights how they don't really have a patriotic bone in their bodies.
I served 4 years in the marines. I did payroll at a company level in the air wing. I have seen dozens of people retire to avoid deployment and I have heard dozens complain about those who did because they were the ones who then had to go. It was always just resentment. After 20 years you can retire whenever you want. To complain about it because you happen to be the guy who replaced him is so disgusting.
When I graduated boot camp we were all given the National Defense Service Medal to wear. This was 1995 long after any real fighting in the first desert storm happened but because we were technically still in it. I don't claim to have been in war or seen combat and neither does he, but we rate those medals as much as anyone does. Comparing who is real military and who isn't is an ancient military pastime and that's fine. But don't you dare try and attack someone about it for politics.
The fact that republicans will attack and destroy 24 years of honorable military service in a pathetic attempt to hit a candidate for VP while at the same time putting up a literal draft dodger who compared his sexcapades to doing "his personal Vietnam" perfectly shows the honor rot that has been spread throughout that party.
I believe the stolen valor accusation is based on this sustack article by Jordan Schachtel, that the issue revolves around an "uncorrected" claim that Tim Walz served overseas in Operation Enduring Freedom, when his military records do not support the truth of that claim. Here's a link to his article if you care to look into it further:
Oh I read it. It's a lie. His reserve division was activated and sent to Italy to serve in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. That is literally from his service record. He has never claimed to have seen combat or been in a combat zone. All this talk boils down to a mealy phrase where he talks about gun control while at war. Like I don't know first hand that any service member will have been trained in how to use a weapon whether he actually sees combat or not. And on top of that he is artillery trained. So he knows more about combat arms than I do. A legit united states marine. It's gross.
And as far as I am aware, he has never corrected the record of active combat either. A lie is all about one's own personal belief system and as you seemed to be triggered a bit by how some people feel on the subject, I thought I would share a different perspective from a few others. Peace.
Based on that comment alone, I don't believe you even read the articles as apparently according to the articles, these accusations against Mr. Walz are not new and in fact have been going on for quite some time. So by your refusal to give even a little credence to other veterans who knew him and did actually serve in combat, you are accusing them of lying about veterans which is the very thing you claim to take personally. Unlike Tim Walz though, these actual war fighters are not getting any personal gain out of it.
I have read them. And they are not new. I even know who originally made them. The person who ended up taking his place on the deployment. Think about that. The guy who had to go because you retired. Something you were entitled to because you had served your time honorably. So the guy in his bitterness and hate makes a comment that is absurd at face value to anyone with a lick of honor and a knowledge of how retirements work in the military and his opposing side in an election runs with it. By the way the voters decided it was nonsense and he turned his district from red to blue for the first time ever. That's how well that lie played in Minnesota.
Good read David; no matter who the dems took they would have been under fire. That's politics. I took the time to go read the legislation regarding tampon machines in schools in MN. As you know, legislation is brought by the House and much of the testimony was from students who reported friends who simply didn't go to school due to their period and not having hygiene products available.
The bill was overkill when adding the transgender crap in boys bathrooms. Some politicians simply have their head up their ass, when being practical with their refusal to stipulate; in female bathrooms, would have saved the state half the projected costs ($2 per student). That wasn't on Walz by the way.
As far as the VP, i was surprised, i thought Shapiro was the easy choice. Odd, 55 years in MN, and now 21 years in AZ, both Kelly and Walz were personally interesting. And to be fair, i once attended an AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh, so that obviously colored my view of Josh. Kidding, of course.
I've read about 2 dozen articles, hundreds of comments and watched Walz's speech in Philly. The consensus, while not unanimous, has been he has been an add for Harris. I guess the best comparison would be whether you think j d vance has added anything to the trump ticket? It doesn't seem like it, but time will tell.
I think the best outcome from the Harris/Walz combination has been the obvious chemistry. Looking more like a partnership than being subservient was a quality that Kamala obviously valued. So far it appears to be working. The prospect of those who weren't chosen getting on board and working to win in November seems to be real as well.
I am curious about the new Georgia legislation? Perhaps a deeper dive is warranted. I remember arguing with Steve when Georgia passed new voter registration laws in 2021 (i think), but this latest piece looks more like an attempt to take the vote away from the voters...what am i missing?
Dave, I seldom agree with your conclusions. This time I find myself at 180-degrees. Other than his lack of “sex appeal” he is the most radical, deceitful, and duplicitous choice imaginable. I don’t have to prove this, it will make itself obvious with even the most minimal amount of reportage.
There's absolutely no evidence of what you allege. Just speculation by daughters of a podiatrist who cannot back it up. Mobility issues can be disqualifying.
Could not read the link. But it's nowhere near the same thing and you know it. If you are joking; Ha Ha. If not, you should try walking 18 miles at Fort Benning, Georgia in July or August wearing an 8-pound steel helmet and a full backpack and 1964 Army boots and carrying an M-1 rifle (or a 30-pound BAR like I did). You're a smart guy but in this case, you speak from ignorance.
Let me put this another way - I'm 100% skeptical that if Trump didn't have his family money and connections, that he would have received a deferment. The guy has been gaming the system his whole life, and I don't for a minute believe that he wasn't gaming it then.
I know that's not going to convince you, but this argument was already over as soon as folks started combing Walz's record, while giving Trump, who has been less than his honorable towards those who have served and died for this country. Yes, I also believe John Kelly's accounts of what he witnessed while serving under Trump.
I don't expect that to move the needle for you one way or the other, but I can also sleep well knowing that I'm defending the guy who gave more to this country than his opponents on the other ticket combined.
I think it would be interesting to ask veterans and active duty personnel who would they prefer as Commander-in-Chief - Trump or Walz (if he were running for President).
Really Cooter? Go ask John McCain who he would rather have. How did you feel when he wrapped himself in the flag? How about the disrespect to Gold Star families? And God forbid he got his hair wet when in Europe he didn't bother go to the service men's graves.
Congrats to all those in involved who spiked the member comment totals to well above the normal number (10 or less by my best guess). I know some of you have been following the Racket crew as long as i have, while some are newer.
Comments are most assuredly not the best gauge for how many are actually reading what they write, as the number posting is usually far less than those following along. I enjoy the exchange of ideas in the comments and while my bias is obvious with my likes, i read them all.
Not my job to tell you thanks for the now 77 responses, but good on all of you. More-so, to Steve, David and Jay for continuing the long slow trudge of this side hustle with no real reward other than the utter devotion and appreciation from those of us who do follow.
Kudos boys; and the occasional female who help add a touch of class.
Regardless of the facts in this case, very few voters have any association, understanding or appreciation for military service. Even when family participation in the military was higher, voters elected Bill Clinton who admitted he promised to enroll in ROTC to avoid the draft and then reneged. During the Vietnam war, the National Guard and Army reserve units were fully staffed and had a waiting list. That was because the draft was active and instead of activating Guard and Reserve units, the military filled it's needs with draftees. Today, the reserve forces are expected to be ready and are called on to serve. That means the reserve forces rely on their officers and NCOs to be ready and able.
This whole controversy means little because so few voters care and some of those who do had bad experiences with the military. I and maybe a few million others do but it might be 2% of the voters at most.
I think most politicians are experts at lying, but deliberately misleading people about your service to your country is pretty low and speaks volumes about a person’s character and integrity. But I agree with you that most people could not care less.
You weren't Vicki. The discussion regarding Walz's service record is incomplete, especially when referencing character and integrity don't you think if trump isn't included in the summation?
No not really. I do not feel the need to talk about Trump with every single issue that crosses my path. From what I could see the majority of the comments were about Tim Walz and how he represented his military service and that was the topic I was attempting to engage in. That being said, I think there is an extreme lack of integrity across the board with our political leaders and wannabe leaders, so I guess if we have to include Trump in everything, then I will say that as far as I'm concerned at least from a political angle, he does not seem to be lacking company. But it's very possible that I am missing something and Trump has somewhere along the line misrepresented his military service or lack thereof.
I just noted in your 20 plus responses regarding Walz, you were over worried about Tim's "omission." So be it, i guess. Have you read Adam Kinzinger's Substack response? If you are interested i can post a link to it. If not, i won't waste my time.
Just read through the whole thread of comments and truly fascinating the personal attacks on Walz's military career and his sins of omission. Let me be really, really freaking blunt here to anyone suggesting trump is better for the country/military or any other single facet of the American way of life.
With all due respect, let's start with trump wrapping his large body in the American flag, any service member applaud that and go "right on?" But that's mere child's play compared to the way he treated John McCain. Was there a more deserving "hero" than John, what he gave to this country and the way he honored his fellow POW's by allowing them to leave Vietnam ahead of him?
Don't even get me started on Gold Star families and his performance or lack there-of overseas when refusing to go to the graves of fallen soldiers.
Give me a freaking break on your self-righteous personal attacks on a man who gave 24 years in the service of his country and retired. Screaming he should come clean about omission while trump has literally pissed on John MaCain's grave is unadulterated bullshit.
My apologies for being overly graphic but too many of you have wallowed in the trump pig sty for so long you can't see the forest through the mud.
I feel like this whole "stolen valor" thing is some brilliant rope-a-dope from the Democrats.
"Let's see if we can get the draft dodger's side to loudly complain about a fellow who served honorably for over two decades!"
I do not think retiring rather than deploying quite as dishonorable as some others believe. It is disappointing. What is dishonorable is staying in the Guard past retirement eligibility if he had no intention of participating in a call-up. Unless there is evidence he truly improved the battalion readiness, I am skeptical. Accepting pay for military service only to afford a nicer car or vacation is somewhat dishonest.
He was eligible for retirement at year 20, and then signed up for another 4 years after 9/11. He was sent to Europe for base security duty.
The timing of his House campaign, retirement, and his former unit's deployment orders to combat duty sure sound like he planned to retire and be a Congressperson without knowledge of the pending deployment.
See the link I posted above.
In the first video, "Fellow veteran speaks out...", have a look at 1:00 to 1:20. With that, and the text of the article, one can piece together a timeline...
The unit received their Warning Order for deployment, Walz talked about running for congress but stated he would deploy, then later retired.
I pretty much just lurk here now but that stolen valor crap has really pissed me off. Dude serves honorably for 24 years but republicans just don't care if you happen to be a democrat. It's just gross and highlights how they don't really have a patriotic bone in their bodies.
I served 4 years in the marines. I did payroll at a company level in the air wing. I have seen dozens of people retire to avoid deployment and I have heard dozens complain about those who did because they were the ones who then had to go. It was always just resentment. After 20 years you can retire whenever you want. To complain about it because you happen to be the guy who replaced him is so disgusting.
When I graduated boot camp we were all given the National Defense Service Medal to wear. This was 1995 long after any real fighting in the first desert storm happened but because we were technically still in it. I don't claim to have been in war or seen combat and neither does he, but we rate those medals as much as anyone does. Comparing who is real military and who isn't is an ancient military pastime and that's fine. But don't you dare try and attack someone about it for politics.
The fact that republicans will attack and destroy 24 years of honorable military service in a pathetic attempt to hit a candidate for VP while at the same time putting up a literal draft dodger who compared his sexcapades to doing "his personal Vietnam" perfectly shows the honor rot that has been spread throughout that party.
Thank you for serving. I think Marines are a special breed.
Sorry, for further perspective, I also meant to include this link from substack writer Chris Bray:
https://substack.com/home/post/p-147475161
I believe the stolen valor accusation is based on this sustack article by Jordan Schachtel, that the issue revolves around an "uncorrected" claim that Tim Walz served overseas in Operation Enduring Freedom, when his military records do not support the truth of that claim. Here's a link to his article if you care to look into it further:
https://substack.com/home/post/p-147450586
Oh I read it. It's a lie. His reserve division was activated and sent to Italy to serve in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. That is literally from his service record. He has never claimed to have seen combat or been in a combat zone. All this talk boils down to a mealy phrase where he talks about gun control while at war. Like I don't know first hand that any service member will have been trained in how to use a weapon whether he actually sees combat or not. And on top of that he is artillery trained. So he knows more about combat arms than I do. A legit united states marine. It's gross.
And as far as I am aware, he has never corrected the record of active combat either. A lie is all about one's own personal belief system and as you seemed to be triggered a bit by how some people feel on the subject, I thought I would share a different perspective from a few others. Peace.
Yeah I take it personally when people lie about Veterans for personal gain. Or even worse political reasons.
Based on that comment alone, I don't believe you even read the articles as apparently according to the articles, these accusations against Mr. Walz are not new and in fact have been going on for quite some time. So by your refusal to give even a little credence to other veterans who knew him and did actually serve in combat, you are accusing them of lying about veterans which is the very thing you claim to take personally. Unlike Tim Walz though, these actual war fighters are not getting any personal gain out of it.
I have read them. And they are not new. I even know who originally made them. The person who ended up taking his place on the deployment. Think about that. The guy who had to go because you retired. Something you were entitled to because you had served your time honorably. So the guy in his bitterness and hate makes a comment that is absurd at face value to anyone with a lick of honor and a knowledge of how retirements work in the military and his opposing side in an election runs with it. By the way the voters decided it was nonsense and he turned his district from red to blue for the first time ever. That's how well that lie played in Minnesota.
I saw a response to the "Tampon Tim" monicker...."Tampon Tim gonna stanch the red wave." 😅😅😅😅
Good read David; no matter who the dems took they would have been under fire. That's politics. I took the time to go read the legislation regarding tampon machines in schools in MN. As you know, legislation is brought by the House and much of the testimony was from students who reported friends who simply didn't go to school due to their period and not having hygiene products available.
The bill was overkill when adding the transgender crap in boys bathrooms. Some politicians simply have their head up their ass, when being practical with their refusal to stipulate; in female bathrooms, would have saved the state half the projected costs ($2 per student). That wasn't on Walz by the way.
As far as the VP, i was surprised, i thought Shapiro was the easy choice. Odd, 55 years in MN, and now 21 years in AZ, both Kelly and Walz were personally interesting. And to be fair, i once attended an AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh, so that obviously colored my view of Josh. Kidding, of course.
I've read about 2 dozen articles, hundreds of comments and watched Walz's speech in Philly. The consensus, while not unanimous, has been he has been an add for Harris. I guess the best comparison would be whether you think j d vance has added anything to the trump ticket? It doesn't seem like it, but time will tell.
I think the best outcome from the Harris/Walz combination has been the obvious chemistry. Looking more like a partnership than being subservient was a quality that Kamala obviously valued. So far it appears to be working. The prospect of those who weren't chosen getting on board and working to win in November seems to be real as well.
I am curious about the new Georgia legislation? Perhaps a deeper dive is warranted. I remember arguing with Steve when Georgia passed new voter registration laws in 2021 (i think), but this latest piece looks more like an attempt to take the vote away from the voters...what am i missing?
I'm learning more about it and may look into a deeper discussion as I do.
The Atlanta Journal did a discussion on their podcast starting at about 34 minutes. It's worth a listen.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3lfhj8zEjH0FT4NKKqOgiZ?si=a851efc499ba4793
Dave, I seldom agree with your conclusions. This time I find myself at 180-degrees. Other than his lack of “sex appeal” he is the most radical, deceitful, and duplicitous choice imaginable. I don’t have to prove this, it will make itself obvious with even the most minimal amount of reportage.
I can imagine a great many more radical, deceitful and duplicitous options.
Yes, Kamala, Biden and the Democrat Party.
Notwithstanding Kamala introducing "Command Sergeant Major "Walz, he RETIRED as a Master Sergeant (E-8).
On Walz's "deployment"...
"“Soldiers are thinking, ‘What does he know that I don’t know?’ That’s the kind of message it sends,” he said."
https://alphanews.org/third-command-sergeant-major-corroborates-story-of-walz-dodging-deployment/
If he only "discovered" some bone spurs, then all would be forgiven?
There's absolutely no evidence of what you allege. Just speculation by daughters of a podiatrist who cannot back it up. Mobility issues can be disqualifying.
"Mobility issues can be disqualifying."
Doesn't seem to have been disqualifying enough to ever affect his golf game that he's so proud of. Or prowling about in the '80s.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1266623/Trump-says-sex-Eighties-personal-Vietnam.html
Could not read the link. But it's nowhere near the same thing and you know it. If you are joking; Ha Ha. If not, you should try walking 18 miles at Fort Benning, Georgia in July or August wearing an 8-pound steel helmet and a full backpack and 1964 Army boots and carrying an M-1 rifle (or a 30-pound BAR like I did). You're a smart guy but in this case, you speak from ignorance.
Let me put this another way - I'm 100% skeptical that if Trump didn't have his family money and connections, that he would have received a deferment. The guy has been gaming the system his whole life, and I don't for a minute believe that he wasn't gaming it then.
I know that's not going to convince you, but this argument was already over as soon as folks started combing Walz's record, while giving Trump, who has been less than his honorable towards those who have served and died for this country. Yes, I also believe John Kelly's accounts of what he witnessed while serving under Trump.
I don't expect that to move the needle for you one way or the other, but I can also sleep well knowing that I'm defending the guy who gave more to this country than his opponents on the other ticket combined.
Seriously Chris? You do a huge disservice to JD Vance who actually did get deployed to a combat zone. That deserves at least a little respect.
Trump himself stated it was bone spurs, and that's what's in his Selective Service records.
The question is why he was classified as 1-Y after that medical exam, and then later to 4F.
I don't doubt it was bone spurs. They can hinder mobility, certainly what is required in the Army or Marine Corps.
Looking into it, the spurs were ~1968 - but in 1972 he was 4F-ed: so...not so short term? Or something else?
Shame the Army didn't maintain those records...
I think it would be interesting to ask veterans and active duty personnel who would they prefer as Commander-in-Chief - Trump or Walz (if he were running for President).
Really Cooter? Go ask John McCain who he would rather have. How did you feel when he wrapped himself in the flag? How about the disrespect to Gold Star families? And God forbid he got his hair wet when in Europe he didn't bother go to the service men's graves.
Congrats to all those in involved who spiked the member comment totals to well above the normal number (10 or less by my best guess). I know some of you have been following the Racket crew as long as i have, while some are newer.
Comments are most assuredly not the best gauge for how many are actually reading what they write, as the number posting is usually far less than those following along. I enjoy the exchange of ideas in the comments and while my bias is obvious with my likes, i read them all.
Not my job to tell you thanks for the now 77 responses, but good on all of you. More-so, to Steve, David and Jay for continuing the long slow trudge of this side hustle with no real reward other than the utter devotion and appreciation from those of us who do follow.
Kudos boys; and the occasional female who help add a touch of class.
Huzzah for the REAL Racket News!
Regardless of the facts in this case, very few voters have any association, understanding or appreciation for military service. Even when family participation in the military was higher, voters elected Bill Clinton who admitted he promised to enroll in ROTC to avoid the draft and then reneged. During the Vietnam war, the National Guard and Army reserve units were fully staffed and had a waiting list. That was because the draft was active and instead of activating Guard and Reserve units, the military filled it's needs with draftees. Today, the reserve forces are expected to be ready and are called on to serve. That means the reserve forces rely on their officers and NCOs to be ready and able.
This whole controversy means little because so few voters care and some of those who do had bad experiences with the military. I and maybe a few million others do but it might be 2% of the voters at most.
I think most politicians are experts at lying, but deliberately misleading people about your service to your country is pretty low and speaks volumes about a person’s character and integrity. But I agree with you that most people could not care less.
Character...what an intriguing topic when trump is rolled into the equation don't ya think VC?
Hi Bill, I didn't realize I was talking about Trump.
You weren't Vicki. The discussion regarding Walz's service record is incomplete, especially when referencing character and integrity don't you think if trump isn't included in the summation?
No not really. I do not feel the need to talk about Trump with every single issue that crosses my path. From what I could see the majority of the comments were about Tim Walz and how he represented his military service and that was the topic I was attempting to engage in. That being said, I think there is an extreme lack of integrity across the board with our political leaders and wannabe leaders, so I guess if we have to include Trump in everything, then I will say that as far as I'm concerned at least from a political angle, he does not seem to be lacking company. But it's very possible that I am missing something and Trump has somewhere along the line misrepresented his military service or lack thereof.
I just noted in your 20 plus responses regarding Walz, you were over worried about Tim's "omission." So be it, i guess. Have you read Adam Kinzinger's Substack response? If you are interested i can post a link to it. If not, i won't waste my time.
Just read through the whole thread of comments and truly fascinating the personal attacks on Walz's military career and his sins of omission. Let me be really, really freaking blunt here to anyone suggesting trump is better for the country/military or any other single facet of the American way of life.
With all due respect, let's start with trump wrapping his large body in the American flag, any service member applaud that and go "right on?" But that's mere child's play compared to the way he treated John McCain. Was there a more deserving "hero" than John, what he gave to this country and the way he honored his fellow POW's by allowing them to leave Vietnam ahead of him?
Don't even get me started on Gold Star families and his performance or lack there-of overseas when refusing to go to the graves of fallen soldiers.
Give me a freaking break on your self-righteous personal attacks on a man who gave 24 years in the service of his country and retired. Screaming he should come clean about omission while trump has literally pissed on John MaCain's grave is unadulterated bullshit.
My apologies for being overly graphic but too many of you have wallowed in the trump pig sty for so long you can't see the forest through the mud.