While the saying is true that vice presidential candidates generally do not have much influence on the success of presidential candidates, they still give us plenty of food for debate.
This is especially true for current competitors.
Vice President Kamala Harris had barely uttered the name of her chosen running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, when Republican vice presidential candidate Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio leveled allegations of “stolen valor” against Walz. “Stolen valor” is a colorful, colloquial, yet often apt term for an old and sometimes illegal offense — false claims of rank, honors or combat service by military imposters.
Echoing the “Swift Boating” campaign against John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate who was accused of lying about his Vietnam service and awards, the Trump camp accused Walz of leaving the military just months before his unit was sent to Iraq to avoid combat.
As Vance, who served as the Navy’s press secretary in Iraq, campaigned in Michigan on Wednesday, he questioned whether the timing of Walz’s retirement from the military was “stolen valor.” “Don’t pretend to be someone you’re not,” Vance said. “I would be ashamed to say that I lied about my military service like you did.”
But Walz served a total of 24 years in various Army National Guard units and positions before retiring in 2005. Republicans accuse him of knowing that his unit could soon be deployed to Iraq. Vance was preparing to run for Congress this year. But even if he retired to run for Congress, he had already served enough years to make that decision legally binding.
Republicans have also suggested that Walz inflated his qualifications by describing himself as a “retired command sergeant major.” Although he served at that rank for a time, he was reverted to the rank of master sergeant after leaving the military because he had not completed the courses for the higher rank. A day after that story broke, the Harris campaign updated his online biography to correct the rank.
But now Vance has also been called an “imperfect ambassador” in a report by CNN’s Brianna Kellar because he used his correct job title of “combat correspondent” since, like Walz, he had no actual combat experience.
This made Vance angry, and I can understand why. Having served in similar roles in the Army as an “information specialist,” I am not going to complain about someone who served honorably. In my view, both Walz and Vance fall into that category.
There is a reason why these battles are so intensely fought over military performance in political campaigns. Americans have a long tradition of promoting their military leaders to positions of political power. Ulysses S. Grant, Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy, among others, benefited from this effect.
Because I have been reporting on and commenting on controversies related to “stolen valor” for years, I called a leading expert on the subject, Doug Sterner, a decorated Vietnam veteran and author who created the website Home of Heroes to document the real heroes and combat false claims. He was also a prominent sponsor of legislation to end claims of stolen valor.
“From a LEGAL standpoint, there is no Stolen Valor here in the Walz examples,” he wrote in an email exchange. “When the Stolen Valor Act was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2012, the revised Stolen Valor Act only covered false claims about wearing CERTAIN (not all) medals and had to have a financial benefit to be prosecutable.”
This is not too surprising, given the Supreme Court’s efforts to protect free speech. What is “stolen valor” to one person may be “war history” to another, with virtually no fact-checking involved.
The Internet and the proliferation of media outlets devoted to partisan politics rather than objective fact-finding make it even more difficult to sort through the various claims. A healthy dose of skepticism is in order for all of us – whether in response to claims of bravery and heroism in battle or to critics who claim those claims are lies.
The attacks on Walz and Vance, which focus on obvious quibbles, hardly seem worthy of so much airtime and attention. Walz served honorably for 24 years. He should be proud of that. Vance volunteered for military service in wartime and he should be proud of that. Let’s move on.
Clarence Page is syndicated by the Tribune Content Agency. Readers can email him at [email protected].
