The Walz issue and feigned ignorance by the left.

Leftists claim to have a problem with "attacking Tim Walz" over his "military service." (Quoting a snippet of a CNN sob fest:

"One of the things I think is at what point military service did become a liability?"

At no point.

The liability is when you lie about it or exaggerate it for some political gain.

Tim Walz has, on many more times than on a single occasion, done that very thing.

So even asking the question begs another question: are leftists generally and media-leftists particularly, stupid?

Let me make one thing perfectly clear: if roles were reversed, these same leftists playing ignorant would be beating J.D. Vance and Trump TO DEATH with these SAME allegations. They'd attack his integrity. They'd be asking the exact, same questions about Vance that veterans around the planet are asking about Walz.

I've been both an NCO (Army Staff Sergeant) and commissioned officer. I totally get what it takes.

I enlisted at 17 (day after my 17th birthday, come to think of it) as well during Vietnam, for active duty. I was a Recon Scout in the 3rd Infantry Division. My first enlistment was 4 years.

I was not sent to Vietnam mainly because the Army wasn't shipping 17 -year-olds in 1972. It wasn't an option.

I do not know what Walz's motivation(s) were for abandoning his unit, then on orders for Iraq. Nor do I care.

But the reality of his situation based on the timing of those actions alone are certainly subject to examination.

As the unit's Sergeant Major, he HAD AN OBLIGATION TO HIS TROOPS. PERIOD. And he knew it.

He lied about his obligated term of service; acceptance of the rank of Command Sergeant Major (E9) required an automatic 2 year extension to the 4 years he had reenlisted for.

He deliberately failed to complete his schooling and, as a result, was administratively reduced in rank back to Master Sergeant (E8).

The bottom line?

He was THE senior ranking enlisted soldier in that unit. HE set THE example for ALL of the other NCO's in that battalion.

And the example he set was exiting a unit deploying to combat in Iraq. THAT is abandonment.

So, in complete response to the question?

The 24 years he was in uniform is not the issue. Had he not lied/exaggerated about his rank, his position, and his claims of what amounts to combat? This wouldn't even have been on the radar, although I will point out that both Bush and Quayle were beaten to a pulp by a fringe-left press over THEIR Reserve/Guard service.

THOSE are the issues. And he deserves the same negative attention for it that you know damned well the left would be heaping on Vance if this had been the other way around.

Just remember: democrats simply don't care that he lied. If they did, Dick Blumenthal would have never been elected and twice reelected to the US Senate after lying about his alleged service in Vietnam.

This isn't difficult. And the leftists asking this question already know the answer. They do not move their ball forward by acting as if they can't understand it.

The only thing they care about is making this go away. And they will attack anyone that keeps it alive.

Meanwhile, Walz gets zero accountability for his actions. And they wouldn't have it any other way.