Do GOPers now blow off Ronald Reagan's stirring words on D-Day anniversary, in favor of Donald Trump calling military heroes "suckers and losers"?

D-Day anniversary

 

When we published our June 6 post on the 80th anniversary of  D-Day, the primary purpose was to remember the extraordinary sacrifices of ordinary Americans -- now known as "The Greatest Generation"  -- who came together to eject Hitler and his Nazi forces from France and Western Europe in what would become the decisive battle of World War II. 

The US Department of Defense calls D-Day the “successful beginning of the end of Hitler's tyrannical regime. Without victory in that bloody battle -- which began in the early hours of June 6, 1944, and was recreated by Director Steven Spielberg in the opening scenes of his epic film, Saving Private Ryan -- we likely would have been living in an America, for the past 80 years, that hardly any of us today would recognize.

D-Day resonates deeply here in our Legal Schnauzer household for several reasons. My father, William J. Shuler, was part of a squadron that arrived  on the Normandy beaches three days after the D-Day battle. Here is how I described it in our June 6 post:

How significant was D-Day? It's almost impossible to overstate it. The US Department of Defense calls D-Day the “successful beginning of the end of Hitler's tyrannical regime.” How different would life in America be if Allied troops had not been able to liberate France? That is a disturbing question to contemplate, but my father, William J. Shuler, was there, and he played a role -- I'm quite sure it was a dangerous role -- in securing the freedoms we enjoy today.

William J. Shuler

As I was growing up, I knew about my dad's military service, but I did not know many details. He had a Luger, the distinctive-looking pistol German troops used, and he showed it to me one time. It looked scary to my eyes, and I've never been much of a gun guy, so I did not ask to see it again and did not want to know where he kept it. I think he might have had a Nazi arm band, but I'm not sure about that. (The Luger and arm band, if it actually existed, were part of my family's war-related artifacts mentioned earlier.) As for the Luger, my brother, Paul, almost shot his foot off with the thing, so I was glad we all survived that episode -- especially since the bullet went through our parents' bedroom floor and landed in the basement, barely missing our fish aquarium, which was a heavily trafficked area, where quite a few folks (including me) made a habit of gathering to watch the fish.

My dad died in 2008, and about 10 years later, as my mother was nearing the end of her life, she told me that Dad was in a unit that landed on Normandy beach three days after the D-Day invasion. I've looked online several times for information about Dad's unit, but I haven't found anything so far. My best guess is that they were on what might be called a "recovery mission," to recover bodies, equipment, perhaps German intelligence. I can only imagine the kind of danger my father was in on that mission.

I imagine that unexploded land mines and other munitions dotted the beach. One wrong step, and my father's life would have been over -- and the lives of my siblings and I never would have started.

My story is not the only one in our household that connects to World War II. My wife, Carol, had an uncle (her mother's brother) who was captured and was held in a German prison camp. The trauma of that experience as a POW led to struggles with alcoholism for the rest of his life.

Carol's father, Mark Tovich, was in the South-East Asian theatre of World War II, serving in India, Burma, and nearby locales. To our knowledge, he was not wounded in action, but he did  contract a near-fatal case of yellow fever or malaria. 

As for the troubling current events  noted above, they come with dark irony that should cause all Americans, of whatever political persuasion, to ponder the direction our nation is headed.

The D-Day anniversary is a time to honor those Americans who risked everything to secure the freedoms we enjoy today. How significant were the contributions of Americans to defeating Hitler, his Nazi troops, and the fascist ideology they represented? Perhaps we can answer that question by noting the 80th Anniversary commemoration was held at  Normandy American Cemetery.

What about those of us living on U.S. soil today? Do we ever consider the sacrifices our forebears made to defend our Constitution and the rule of law that is found therein? Do we ever stop and think that the relative peace and stability the United States and Europe have enjoyed since the end of World War II came at an extremely high price? 

If the answer to those questions is yes, how do you explain polls that show a significant chunk of Americans support Donald Trump in our 2024 presidential election?

After all, Trump has made it clear that he does not support American democracy and intends to usher in an authoritarian regime that borrows from dictators and fascist regimes, both past and present. Trump has openly stated that he might suspend the constitution and act as a supreme ruler in the mold of Hitler, Mussolini, Putin, and other "strong men." Trump repeatedly has stated his admiration for dictatorial rulers. We encourage readers to check out The Washington Post op-ed piece by Robert Kagan under the title "We have a radical democracy. Will Trump voters destroy it?

By the way, Trump even has praised Hitler,  and a noted historian says his campaign rhetoric sounds like that of a fascist.

This is what I meant in the earlier references to troubling current events, filled with dark irony. After all, the United States has been a beacon for democratic principles since many of us have been alive. So, how can any of us actually think a Donald Trump presidency would be a good idea? This is the guy who has repeatedly said he could prosecute his political enemies, which would be unlawful on numerous grounds.

The November election is going to be unlike any we have seen before. It will not be about Democrats vs. Republicans or progressives vs. conservatives. It will be an existential moment, with the incumbent (Joe Biden) favoring democracy and the challenger (Donald Trump), touting authoritarianism, featuring his own brand of scatter-brained, dysfunctional "leadership" -- and we have seen in his first term how that worked out, with Trump's botched handling of the coronavirus pandemic leading to more than 1 million American deaths and leaving our economy in dire condition, as outlined in this 2020 article.

Since this  election, unlike any in our history, will be about democracy vs. authoritarianism, does that mean Trump supporters believe our country would be better off to usher out 250 years of democracy in favor of a glorified dictatorship, one built according to Donald Trump's whims. Since Trump is a liar of epic proportions, does anyone trust a single word he says? I find it hard to believe anyone would trust him with a corner lemonade stand, much less the presidency. I encourage readers to check out this post, which spells out the plusses and minuses of a Biden-Trump matchup.

So, how to explain the support Trump seems to enjoy? A simple answer might me to say all MAGA Republicans are stupid. But I know a number of Trump supporters, and I know they aren't stupid. What IS going on with them? I can only speculate, but my best guess is that they haven't thought through the repercussions of turning the wheel over to Donald Trump. Since Trump gained nationwide fame as a reality game-show host, it's possible his followers are start-struck and delusional about who he really is. Trump's "birther" attacks on former President Barack Obama might appeal to some dark impulses in his followers.

It's also possible Trump followers could benefit from examining their own family histories to learn about the sacrifices their forebears have made. I only know about my family's military service, some of it dating to the 1860s and the Civil War, because my mother and father preserved communications and artifacts that they instinctively seem to know had value for future generations. Many Trump supporters undoubtedly have similar family histories, and examining those might cause them to reconsider their support for Trump, who shows growing signs of being unfit (both mentally and physically) to serve in high office.

With the D-Day anniversary having just passed, now might be an appropriate time for all Americans to give serious thought to what is at stake in the 2024 election. The future of our country depends on it.

One final thought: Let's consider this account from the Washington Examiner of Ronald Reagan's speech from the  1984 D-Day anniversary:

In commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the invasion of Normandy during World War II, President Ronald Reagan spoke from Point-du-Hoc on the Normandy shores, praising those who risked their lives to “fight for all humanity.”

“The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next,” he said. “It was the deep knowledge — and pray God we have not lost it — that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.”

“You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you,” he added.

Let's compare those words to those of Donald Trump, who has called military heroes "suckers and losers." 

Is that what MAGA Republicans, Trump supporters, think of those who served in our military? Are they OK with Trump's words?

And what about Ronald Reagan, who spoke eloquently about the sacrifices that helped secure America's freedoms. Republicans used to lionize Reagan, wanted to name numerous federal buildings after him. Is Reagan just a relic of the past to postmodern Republicans? Does he stand for anything in their minds? Have the nonsensical rantings of Donald Trump replaced the beautifully written words and heartfelt delivery of Ronald Reagan? Maybe MAGAs should take a hard look at their priorities.

As we commemorate the 80th anniversary of D-Day, I confront mortality and existential questions raised by my family's service in World War II and the Civil War

(imdb.com)

 

Today marks the 80th anniversary of the D-Day invasion on Normandy Beach, which began the liberation of France and the rest of Western Europe, laying the foundation for the Allied victory over Nazi Germany in World War II. The D-Day anniversary will be commemorated today at Normandy American Cemetery. 

The event hits close to home for my wife, Carol, and me -- plus our extended families. It also raises unsettling questions about current events in our nation. We will address those issues later, but first, let's examine the personal journeys of my family members, which raise existential questions about my presence on this earth -- why I am even here.

I never served in the military, but in what you might call a celestial sense, my premortal life was marked by ties to two, bloody, world-changing wars, one dating to the 1860s. Without getting too "heavy," I owe my existence to the ability of my forebears -- on both sides of my family -- to survive two of the most dangerous conflicts in human history.

I know about my ties to war only because my family has possessed and preserved communications and artifacts from WW II and the Civil War for decades. In fact, my mother possessed the original copy of a letter from a relative on her side of the family who fought in the Civil War. She eventually donated the letter to the visitor's center and museum at the Wilson's Creek National Battlefield, where it is part of the historical record.

Millions of Americans, I'm sure, have similar stories, but this is my story, which seems appropriate to share as we commemorate D-Day and remember those who gave (or risked) their lives to defend our Constitution and beat back the scourge of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

William J. Shuler

How significant was D-Day? It's almost impossible to overstate it. The US Department of Defense calls D-Day the “successful beginning of the end of Hitler's tyrannical regime.” How different would life in America be if Allied troops had not been able to liberate France? That is a disturbing question to contemplate, but my father, William J. Shuler, was there, and he played a role -- I'm quite sure it was a dangerous role -- in securing the freedoms we enjoy today.

As I was growing up, I knew about my dad's military service, but I did not know many details. He had a Luger, the distinctive-looking pistol German troops used, and he showed it to me one time. It looked scary to my eyes, and I've never been much of a gun guy, so I did not ask to see it again and did not want to know where he kept it. I think he might have had a Nazi arm band, but I'm not sure about that. (The Luger and arm band, if it actually existed, were part of my family's war-related artifacts mentioned earlier.) As for the Luger, my brother, Paul, almost shot his foot off with the thing, so I was glad we all survived that episode -- especially since the bullet went through our parents' bedroom floor and landed in the basement, barely missing our fish aquarium, which was a fairly heavily trafficked area, where quite a few folks (including me) made a habit of gathering to watch the fish.

My dad died in 2008, and about 10 years later as my mother was nearing the end of her life, she told me that Dad was in a unit that landed on Normandy beach three days after the D-Day invasion. I've looked online several times for information about Dad's unit, but I haven't found anything so far. My best guess is that they were on what might be called a "recovery mission," to recover bodies, equipment, perhaps German intelligence. I can only imagine the kind of danger my father was in on that mission.

I imagine that unexploded land mines and other munitions dotted the beach. One wrong step, and my father's life would have been over -- and the lives of my siblings and I never would have started.

When you know that a loved one has faced danger and taken great risk to protect our country, our Constitution, our democracy,  you have extra appreciation that we are a nation of laws, and you want to see those laws faithfully upheld, not trampled by corrupt judges, lawyers, law-enforcement officials, and other rogues who seem to have no respect for the sacrifices so many have made to protect the country we enjoy today. In fact, exposing such corruption, which essentially spits on the graves of brave men like my father, is why I started this blog, Legal Schnauzer, in 2007 and have written it continuously for 17 years. Along the way, we were ranked in 2013 among the top 50 independent law blogs in North America. That suggests, to me, that the subject matter here resonates with many of my fellow Americans.

My story is not the only one in our household that connects to World War II. My wife, Carol, had an uncle (her mother's brother) who was captured and served in a German prison camp. The trauma of that experience as a POW led to struggles with alcoholism for the rest of his life.

As for my premortal ties to war in the 1860s, it involves the Battle of Wilson's Creek, which was the first major battle of the Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War. It was fought on August 10, 1861, near Springfield, Missouri.

A man named Elijah Stamps, a relative from my mother's side of the family, was among the 12,120 troops in the mixed Missouri/Arkansas/Confederate force that wound up fighting in the Battle of Wilson's Creek, which produced an estimated 2,550 casualties (killed, wounded, or captured) and was the second major battle of the Civil War, the first fought west of the Mississippi River.

Elijah Stamps, while on the battlefield, wrote a letter to his wife, Elvira. Based on my knowledge of our family history, which can be sketchy in places, Elijah Stamps survived the battle, and his letter somehow wound up with my mother, who treasured it for decades and ultimately made sure it became part of the battlefield's museum collection.

Writing this post has caused me to do the kind of high-minded thinking that I generally try to avoid -- especially when it involves an outcome that could have been not too positive for me, at least when it involves earthly life. Many of you probably have similar stories in your background, some you might not know about. I only know about mine because my mother and father seemed to understand certain items in our household had historical value and helped tell stories that were worth preserving. All of that rolls through my mind today as we remember the 80th anniversary of D-Day. I wonder about what horrors my Dad must have seen, remnants of man's inhumanity to man, a reminder of the wreckage tyrants can wreak. I marvel at his ability to process these images and become a valuable member of society -- a wonderful father and husband, providing lasting examples of a life well-lived.

As for my own efforts at high-minded thinking, these thoughts come to mind:

* What if my father had not survived at Normandy beach? My life, and the family I grew up in, never would have existed;

* As for the Civil War part of our story, that is a bit more complicated. I've never known Elijah Stamps' exact place in our family tree. But it appears he is on the same branch as my grandfather Chess Stamps. Had Elijah Stamps not survived at Wilson's Creek -- in a battle so violent the site now is known as Bloody Hill -- Chess Stamps would have never been born -- and that means my mother never would have been born. That, of course, means my siblings and I never would have taken our places on the stage of life.

I'm grateful to be here, to be able to write this post -- even though writing through tears is not a joyous experience. But I hope readers might find insight in the words I share this day.

As for the unsettling current events mentioned earlier, we will examine them next.

(To be continued)

The Watkins and Shuler families know this: When a loved one risks all to protect our Constitution, injustice and the rule of law become deeply personal matters

Joseph T. Watkins

What would it feel like to put your life on the line for your country only to return home as the target of racial discrimination? As a White American, I struggle to conjure up an answer to that question. But the family of longtime Alabama attorney and civil-rights advocate Donald Watkins (who is Black) has faced it in a close-up way. That's because his uncle, Joseph T. Watkins, lived it.

I suspect that experience helped Donald Watkins fight for the rule of law -- including publishing a Web site about justice issues (donaldwatkins.com) -- in a legal career of almost 50 years. It also might explain my desire to start the Legal Schnauzer blog in 2007 and keep it going continuously for 23 years.

How is that? Watkins helps explain it in an article published yesterday under the headline "Joseph T. Watkins: This Soldier Fought America’s Foreign and Domestic Enemies." Donald Watkins writes:

Joseph T. Watkins was my father’s youngest brother. He was smart, strong, and brave.

We called him “Uncle J.T.”

Uncle J.T. was a World War II veteran who served as a corporal in an all-black Army unit that fought in the campaign to liberate France from Nazi occupation. He was proud of his military service for America, and the Watkins family was proud of him.

Uncle J.T. would later become an effective fighter in another kind of war -- the never-ending battle for the protection and advancement of civil and constitutional rights in America.

After the War, Uncle J.T. moved to Washington and became a housing inspector for the District of Columbia government. He also rose through the ranks to become president of his local federal employees’ union.

The racial discrimination Uncle J.T. faced in Washington during the late 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s was heartbreaking. Uncle J.T. had put his life on the line in France for a nation that despised him at home.

I've known Donald Watkins for 8-10 years -- in fact, we were the two online journalists who wrote about "Luv Guv" Robert Bentley and the "Girlfriend Scandal," featuring senior aide Rebekah Caldwell Mason, that eventually forced Bentley to resign, drawing national news coverage in the process. Donald and I wrote about the Bentley scandal for roughly seven months before the mainstream press began to give it serious attention -- and we received relatively little credit for it.

AL.com columnist John Archibald appeared several times on The Rachel Maddow Show and was wrongly credited with "breaking" the Bentley story. The truth? Watkins and I wrote about the Bentley scandal, with depth and detail, for seven months before Archibald or anyone in the mainstream press gave it a serious look.

Bentley's own words and actions indicate he considered Watkins and me to be the central drivers of the "Girlfriend Scandal" that brought down his political career. Documents from a lawsuit involving Spencer Collier, former head of the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA), show that Bentley asked multiple subordinates to unlawfully use state and federal criminal databases in an effort to retaliate against us for our journalism.

While I have known Donald Watkins for a number of years, I did not know the story of his Uncle J.T. until yesterday. I've never encountered anything approaching the racial discrimination Uncle J.T. experienced. But I did work one summer in a rubber factory -- making V-belts for domestic vehicles, appliances, military equipment, and more -- and I remember working on the line with Vietnam veterans who said they felt the American public never appreciated their service in what proved to be an unpopular war.

I thought of that when I read about Uncle J.T., and it helped me realize that, in a roundabout way, my family's story intersects with that of the Watkins family. Here's how: Uncle J.T.'s military service centered around the effort to liberate France from Nazi occupation. My father, William J. Shuler was involved in that effort, too.

William J. Shuler

As I was growing up, I knew about my dad's military service, but I did not know many details. He had a Luger, the distinctive-looking pistol German troops used, and he showed it to me one time. It looked scary to my eyes, and I've never been much of a gun guy, so I did not ask to see it again and did not want to know where he kept it. I think he might have had a Nazi arm band, but I'm not sure about that. As for the Luger, one of my brothers almost shot his foot off with the thing, so I was glad we all survived that episode -- especially since the bullet went through our parents' bedroom floor and landed in the basement, barely missing our fish aquarium, which was a fairly heavily trafficked area, where quite a few folks (including me) made a habit of gathering to watch the fish.

My dad died in 2008, and about 10 years later as my mother was nearing the end of her life, she told me that Dad was in a unit that landed on Normandy beach three days after the D-Day invasion. I've looked online several times for information about Dad's unit, but I haven't found anything so far. My best guess is that they were on what might be called a "recovery mission," to recover bodies, equipment, perhaps German intelligence. I can only imagine the kind of danger my father was in on that mission.

I imagine that unexploded land mines and other munitions dotted the beach. One wrong step, and my father's life would have been over -- and the lives of my siblings and I never would have started.

When you know that a loved one has faced danger and taken great risk to protect our country, our Constitution, our democracy, it tends to make you want to expose the kind of judicial, legal, and law-eforcement crookedness I've witnessed in two states (Alabama and Missouri). It makes you appreciate that we are a nation of laws, and you want to see those laws faithfully upheld, not trampled by judges who have no qualms about violating their oaths of office. I know that is the case with me, and I suspect it drives Donald Watkins, knowing what his Uncle J.T. went through. Writes Watkins:

In 1966, Uncle J.T. initiated an Equal Employment Opportunity Act administrative complaint on behalf of himself and others similarly situated that challenged the District of Columbia's widespread employment discrimination against blacks in hiring and promotional practices. Taking this bold action unleashed pure hell against him as a black employee.

In 1969, Uncle J.T., having exhausted his EEOC administrative remedies, filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that the District of Columbia's unlawful employment and promotional practices violated his civil and constitutional rights, as well as those of the class of blacks he represented.

In 1971, Uncle J.T. won his lawsuit after proving a pervasive pattern of racial discrimination against African-Americans in the District’s employment practices.

However, the trial court declined to grant certain relief requested by Uncle J.T., including (a) an immediate promotion for himself and another nonwhite employee named Somera, the only two employees who had been denied promotions because of race and were still employees; (b) rescission of a specific promotion of a white employee; (c) disciplinary action against persons still employees who were found to have perpetrated the system of racial discrimination; and (d) an injunction against further acts of discrimination and retention of jurisdiction.

Uncle J.T. appealed the trial court’s denial of the promotional relief for himself and Somera and denial of the requested injunctive relief.

On December 29, 1972, Uncle J.T. won the requested equitable relief that had been denied to him and Somera by the trial court.

Black federal employees in the District of Columbia were ecstatic. It was the first major employment-discrimination victory for the plaintiffs' class in the District in the early 1970s.

In making its ruling, the Court of Appeals stated:

“Appellant Watkins, who has for six years waged an almost single-handed battle against racial discrimination in the Housing Division, deserves a clear response from the courts……Accordingly, …… [t]he District Court is directed to remand the question of the promotional status of employees Watkins and Somera to the Hearing Committee or other appropriate administrative forum. The court is also directed to issue an appropriate order enjoining the Housing Division from further acts of racial discrimination and ordering the Division to take steps necessary to ensure that the effects of past discrimination will be eliminated and that there will be no discrimination in the future, the order to provide that the court will retain jurisdiction to enforce its order.”

After I graduated from the University of Alabama's law school in 1973 and passed the Alabama Bar exams several months later, I joined Uncle J.T. on the front lines of the fight against racial discrimination in employment practices in the District of Columbia and other federal agencies in Washington.

With Uncle J.T.’s help, I secured a nice office in a building at the corner of Albemarle St. and Wisconsin Avenue in the Georgetown area of Washington. I represented unionized federal government employees in Washington from 1974 until I was elected to the Montgomery, Alabama, city council in 1979.

Uncle J.T. continued to wage a passionate fight against racial discrimination within a number of federal agencies in the District of Columbia. His passion for the fight was exceeded only by his commitment to the cause of freedom and equality for all.

On June 8, 1973, Uncle J.T. won another round of sweeping injunctive relief for the plaintiffs' class of black District of Columbia employees after the trial court described the government's massive resistance to its anti-discrimination orders as "unreasonable, obdurate obstinacy."

By 1974, Uncle J.T. had achieved as much judicial relief as the courts would grant him and the class he represented. During the pendency of his last motion to enforce the prior court orders regarding the denial of a personal promotion to a GS-12 position, Uncle J.T. received a promotion to a GS-11 position, and later to a GS-12 job, before the Court of Appeals could issue a final ruling on his motion.

With this favorable personnel action and years of accumulated back pay, Uncle J.T. shifted his focus to securing upward mobility for a host of other black employees by establishing an aggressive and well-funded litigation support network.

Uncle J.T. died on November 3, 2005. He fought for equal opportunity until the last breath of life left his body. Uncle J.T. died on his feet fighting like a real soldier. He never got on his knees and surrendered his manhood to anybody.

Donald Trump's latest insult to military personnel has drawn the wrath of the VFW and should enrage all would-be voters who have a functioning conscience

Donald Trump shakes hands with D-Day veterans (U.S. DOD)

 

One of America's largest veterans-advocacy groups has called Donald Trump's comments "asinine" after the Republican presidential candidate compared various medals and concluded that the best ones are those that go to civilians because those recipients tend not to be injured, disabled, or dead. A reasonable person might conclude this is a controversy that easily could have been avoided. After all, is there any need to compare such medals? Is there any reason to declare that one is better than the others? Isn't it an issue that is sure to launch discord and would best be left untouched?  But this is Donald Trump we are talking about here, so he avoided any sign of rational thought, dove headlong into a non-issue, and left a smoldering pile of discord in his wake. 

How did such an unnecessary blowup come to pass? Reporter Eden Teshome, of The Hill, provides insight  under the headline "Veterans of Foreign Wars blasts Trump’s statement as ‘asinine’ Teshome writes:

Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), one of the nation’s largest and oldest veteran advocacy organizations, on Friday condemned former President Trump’s recent statement comparing the Medal of Honor to a presidential award for civilians, calling his remarks “asinine.”

“These asinine comments not only diminish the significance of our nation’s highest award for valor, but also crassly characterized the sacrifices of those who have risked their lives above and beyond the call of duty,” wrote VFW National Commander Al Lipphardt in a Friday statement.

The VFW’s reaction comes after Trump equated the Presidential Medal of Freedom, awarded to civilians, to the Medal of Honor, which is awarded to soldiers wounded in the line of combat.

“That’s the highest award you can get as a civilian. It’s the equivalent of the congressional Medal of Honor, but civilian version,” Trump told attendees at an event at his Bedminster, N.J., club, attended by GOP mega-donor Miriam Adelson, who was awarded the Medal of Freedom in 2018.

“It’s actually much better, because everyone who gets the congressional Medal of Honor, that’s soldiers, they’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead. She gets it, and she’s a healthy, beautiful woman,” Trump said in reference to Adelson. “And they’re rated equal.”

The moment sparked an onslaught of condemnations from veterans-rights advocates and allies.

The words above were not coming from just any politician -- they came from a man who, as of January 2025,  hopes to be commander in chief -- even though he has a long history of insulting officers, rank-and-file troops, prisoners of war, the military dead, just about anyone who ever has worn the uniform. (See here, here, here, here, and here.) Trump even has suggested a high-ranking official should be executed for displeasing him as president.

Trump seems to have a knack for showing disrespect toward military personnel. Teshome writes:

This is not the first time the former president has attracted attention for disparaging comments about wounded veterans. In 2020, the VFW demanded an apology from the president after Trump downplayed the injuries to 34 service members who suffered traumatic brain injuries as a result of retaliatory Iranian airstrikes by saying that they had “headaches.”

“[Traumatic brain injury] is a serious injury and one that cannot be taken lightly,” the organization wrote at the time. “The VFW expects an apology from the president to our service men and women for his misguided remarks.”

The Trump camp has not backed away from the former president’s most recent comments.

In an interview on NewsNation with Leland Vittert, Trump campaign senior adviser Corey Lewandowski defended Trump’s remarks as Vittert asked whether he was doubling down on them.

“Because there are some people who don’t serve in our military but should still be recognized with the highest honor our country has to offer them,” Lewandowski told NewsNation on Friday evening in response to questions from Vittert about Trump’s remarks.

The clip was reposted by Kamala HQ, the Harris campaign’s rapid response team. The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Hill.

The controversy comes as Republicans attempt to attack the service record of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Vice President Harris’s running mate, alleging that discrepancies in his public comments amount to stolen valor. Walz served as an enlisted member of the Army National Guard. Republican Sen. JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, is also a veteran, having served in the Marines during the Iraq War.

Following Harris’s VP announcement, Lipphardt lauded both campaigns for selecting veterans. Ahead of the election, however, VFW’s confidence in the Republican campaign appears to have soured.

“When a candidate to serve as commander-in-chief so brazenly dismisses the valor and reverence symbolized by the Medal of Honor, I question whether they would discharge their responsibilities with the seriousness and discernment necessary,” Lipphardt concluded in his statement. 

“It is even more disappointing when these comments come from a man who has  served in this noble office and frankly should already know better.”

For several months, I've been wondering how any American with functioning brain cells could support Trump. Following Trump's most recent insults toward military personnel, I don't see how a single American could vote for the guy. His disrespect toward the military, in my view, make him unfit to serve as president. How bad have Trump's words and actions been? He reportedly called American dead, buried at a cemetery in France, "suckers" and "losers."

I've never served in the military, but I find such language highly offensive. Like many other American families, the Shulers have skin in this "game. As I reported in June, my father, William J. Shuler, was in a squadron that arrived for a recovery mission at Normandy three days after the D-Day Invasion. 

Another relative, a man named Elijah Stamps from my mother's side of the family in Arkansas, fought in Southwest Missouri for the Confederate Army at the Battle of Wilson's Creek, which was the first major battle of the Trans-Mississippi Theater of the American Civil War. 

 Elijah Stamps, while on the battlefield, wrote a letter to his wife, Elvira. Based on my knowledge of our family history, Elijah Stamps survived the battle, and his letter somehow wound up with my mother, who treasured it for decades and ultimately made sure it became part of the battlefield's museum collection.

 As for the 2024 election, I don't see how any American could cast a vote for someone as despicable as Donald Trump. That decision, of course, rests with the would-be voter, not me.

But in my view, you cannot be a Donald Trump supporter and a patriotic American. He has stated many times that, if elected, he intends to act outside our constitution and usher in an authoritarian regime that might end American democracy forever. (See here and here.) Vote for Donald Trump, if you must, but don't try to con the rest of us into believing you are  a patriot. Your vote will mark you as not even close  to being a patriot.

For those who are interested in digging deeper into issues raised in this post, I highly recommend an article by Robert Kagan, in The Washington Post under the headline "We have a radical democracy. Will Trump voters destroy it?" (April 24, 2024). Trump and his supporters certainly would be wise to read Kagan's piece. They might discover that achieving his stated, undemocratic, goals, will be far more difficult than they might have imagined. 

If you care at all about your country, I have a suggestion. Save all of us a lot of time and trouble and cast your vote for someone who actually is fit to serve as president . . .  someone like Kamala Harris.

Latest polls show Trump's supporters are deserting him, but he still "flooded the zone with s--t" in SOTU, weaving a trail of deceit that could trip up Americans

Trump gives the longest SOTU in modern history (NPR)

If you took yesterday's advice from Robert Reich, you chose to ignore Donald Trump's State of the Union (SOTU) address. That should have you feeling pretty good right now. After all, Reich helped ensure that you did not waste your valuable time listening to the worst president in American history -- and that poll of presidential historians was taken before Trump's nightmarish second term began.

Now, we have more nuggets of hope for those who yearn to see the reins of American government return to the hands of a relatively sane person. That good news comes to us courtesy of Bill Kristol, a one-time Republican who decided around 2016 that the thought of Donald Trump in the White House was more than he could stomach. Kristol now writes opinion pieces for The Bulwark, a center-right news site that caters to "politically homeless" conservatives, those who reject the GOP's current direction and regularly criticize Trump and his allies.

In the lead-up to last night's SOTU, The Bulwark published a Kristol op-ed that offered soothing numbers for those of us who dream of the day America escapes Trump's authoritarian clutches. Let's take a look at Kristol's insights from a piece he wrote before Trump's speech :

Let’s be honest: Tonight will be depressing. When the sergeant at arms proclaims in a stentorian voice to the House chamber, “Mr. Speaker, the president of the United States,” we will be reminded, vividly and unavoidably, that Donald Trump is the president of the United States.

Which is depressing.

But there is a silver lining to that undeniably dark cloud. When President Trump spoke to a joint session of Congress almost a year ago, on March 4, 2025, he was in decent shape politically. Four months before, he’d won the presidency with 49.8 percent of the vote to Kamala Harris’s 48.3 percent. Six weeks into his second term, his support was holding steady: The New York Times polling average had him at 49 percent approval, 48 percent disapproval.

That is only the beginning of the grim statistical picture facing Trump. Kristol writes:

Today, almost a year later, the Times average has Trump at 41 percent approval, 56 percent disapproval. Trump has lost about one sixth of his approval in the last year. A new poll from CNN is even more dramatic, showing Trump at 36 percent approval today, down from 48 percent in that same poll a year ago. That suggests one in four of his original supporters deserting him. And this morning G. Elliott Morris reports on his new poll, which has Trump at 37 percent approval, 59 percent disapproval.

So Trump has lost considerable ground. One of course wishes that even more of the public had changed its mind even more quickly. But as our Declaration of Independence reminds us, the people are often slow to move: “Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves.” The people tend to be characterized more by “patient sufferance” than quick rethinking.

But eventually the people can be brought to see what is happening. Eventually they come to notice “a long train of abuses and usurpations” and the “repeated injuries” of their rulers. Eventually they can say, “Enough.” There’s lots of evidence they’re en route to decisively saying “Enough” at the polls this November. (The new G. Elliott Morris poll has the Democrats up ten points on the congressional generic ballot.) And it’s more likely that public opinion will continue to move in the direction it’s been going than that it will reverse course.

Now it’s true that the public might conceivably reverse course if Trump changed course. But he seems to have no interest in doing so. As was the case with "Mad King George III" of England, when the public has “petitioned for redress in the most humble terms,” those petitions “have been answered only by repeated injury.”

Like Kristol, I struggle to understand how a substantial number of Americans ever came to believe that a man convicted on 34 felony counts in a criminal trial, adjudicated a rapist in a civil trial, and caught on tape admitting to being a sexual abuser should serve as president. Heck, I'm not sure a person with such a record would even be allowed to tour the White House, much less Occupy the Oval Office. Consider this information from AI Overview:

Mandatory Background Check: All visitors over the age of 18 must submit to a background check, which requires a full legal name, date of birth, and Social Security Number.

• Automatic Denials: The system likely flags individuals with active warrants, pending felony charges, or multiple convictions for violent crimes or serious drug offenses.
• Prior Convictions: Generally, past non-violent convictions do not guarantee a denial, but they are reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

It is tempting to write off Trump supporters as ignorant rubes. But I, for one, have a slight problem with that: Over the years, especially during my days in Alabama (although Missouri isn't much different; I call it "Alabama with snowballs"), I've come to know a large number of people -- people I like and respect -- that I feel certain have voted for Trump. And I know terms such as "ignorant," "stupid," "unethical," or any similar pejorative do not apply to these folks.

On top of that, my wife Carol and I might be the only liberals on my side of our family. My niece, Dr. Erin Gerhardt, is a physician in St. Louis, and she seems to have progressive sensibilities. She and I have never had any political discussions -- I learned a long time ago that is a subject best avoided on family occasions -- so I'm not sure where she stands on the right/left divide. But I'm confident she is a fine doctor and a swell citizen -- and she tends to get five-star ratings from her patients, so I think that's pretty cool. In fact, I have a number of nieces and nephews that I think either are -- or will turn out to be -- swell citizens. And whether they agree with me or not, I find it hard to put political labels on them. 

As for Trump, I will admit my feelings toward him fall into the "hatred" range. And I will further admit that probably isn't terribly healthy. But I also don't think it's healthy to stay silent regarding someone who slings insults at my family's heritage -- and the heritage of many other American families -- who have seen loved ones put their lives on the line for U.S. democracy. 

I've written before about my father, William J. Shuler, who was part of a squadron that arrived at Normandy Beach three days after D-Day. My late father-in-law, Mark Tovich, served in the South-East Asia Theatre in World War II, especially in India and Burma, contracting a near fatal case of malaria or yellow fever. My late aunt Imogene Stamps, my late uncle Carl Stamps (both of Arkansas), and my late uncle Henry Shuler (of Aldrich, Missouri) all served in WWII. 

To have Trump refer to my relatives, and millions of people like my relatives who served as "suckers" and "losers" is hard to forgive in my mind -- especially when Trump has never acknowledged that he was in the wrong.

Did last night's SOTU help Trump? It might, but only if Americans allow themselves to be conned by a president who lies with impunity. NBC News conducted a fact check that showed Trump's claims related to tariffs, drug prices, inflation, global investments, tax cuts, mail voting, and election fraud were false. Claims related to Trump ending wars, fraud in Minnesota, new construction jobs, and crime in D.C. were exaggerated or lacked evidence.

For closing thoughts on Trump, let's give the last word to Bill Kristol:

Tonight, we’ll see a president who will speak—at length!—making the case for the path he’s chosen. But this speech is no more likely to help Trump than his address a year ago, which helped him not at all. It was a week after his appearance before Congress that Trump’s approval and disapproval lines crossed for the first time since he returned to the presidency. Since then his approval has steadily continued down, and his disapproval has steadily gone up. Those trends are likely to continue.

It’s worth noting that this public rejection has happened without war and without a recession, two common proximate causes of a decline in presidential popularity—though we may be teetering close to both. On the economy in particular, it turns out not to be always true that it’s the economy, stupid. After all, it doesn’t seem to have mostly been the economy in 1776. Almost none of the charges in the Declaration is about the material well-being of the colonists. The indictment there is that “a prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” 

That’s surely the case today.

But it’s also worth noting that unfit rulers can sometimes hold on to power. The publication of the Declaration of Independence didn’t achieve independence. That took years of war. And like Mad King George, Trump will not give up easily. He has many levers of power in the executive branch at his disposal. He and his supporters have tons of money to spend on the coming elections. They have the acquiescence of many elites outside of government. They will not go gently into their well-deserved night.

Tonight Trump will, as Steve Bannon memorably put it, “flood the zone with shit.” The good news is that the American people seem increasingly sickened by the odor. But we have a long struggle ahead to get rid of it.