THE 2024 VICE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

 This will be s short post - THEY BOTH WON.  Tonight I saw Gov. Tim Walz, not trying out to join the football cheerleaders squad, but as an honest, intelligent man groping for political answers that might work.  I did not agree with most of his positions, but I grew to respect the man who is running on a major ticket, and who might become President.  He agreed with Vance on various points, and his nodding head indicated this even before he spoke.  Walz seemed sensible, warm. caring, human.

J.D. Vance, Ohio Senator had raised my ire on several issues already - lying about Haitians eating pets in Springfield, proposing additional votes for those with children, and maintaining that those without children had no stake in the nation, to name a few.  But instead of the belligerent bull dog in a china shop, Vance made his points but agreed when he could with Vance.  They both saw similar problems, and at times seemed to suggest similar proposals to solve them.  He would nod his head in agreement while Walz spoke, too.  It seemed quite friendly.

The moderators were two CBS news leaders, Nora O'Donnell, who anchors the nightly news, and Margaret Brennan who hosts the Sunday morning show Face the Nation.  Both one may assume are liberals, and Nora's nightly news will go out of its way to spotlight female achievement, and often ignore that of men.  Before the debate, I wondered if they might unleash cats to attack Vance because of his remarks about some women not having children and wanting cats.  Would they make cats screech into the microphone when Vance spoke?  Happily, the women did not bring felines.  But they did help the Democrat by not asking about the unending wars and threats of wars under Biden, compared to the relative peace under Trump.  The women seem to agree with Nance Pelosi that it is treason to question the results of the 2020 election.  And they and Walz seem to prefer censorship, denial of free speech, to even question the legitimacy of Joe Biden's election in 2020.  Happily, neither "moderator" is on the ballot.

I now have a more favorable opinion of both Vance and Walz, and that is comforting as either could beome a US President.        Hugh Murray

A friend read my email version of this blog, and did not like it.  Here is his criticism:

I didn't watch the debate but saw a few highlights afterwards.

I heard Walz say very passionately that he wanted censorship of hate speech. Beware! You'd be in jail for a long time under president/ vice president Waltz just for writing your blog!!! His personality hardly matters. Policies on the other hand do, a lot. 

There goes your First amendment.

 

Then he said, the problem is not mental health rather the guns.

There goes the Second amendment

When asked about Walz lying about being in Tiananmen square during the massacre, he said that he "grew up in a small town with 400 people where he rode his bicycle and was proud of the service". huh... what?

 

He wouldn't answer questions from Vance about their abortion bill on punishment for doctors who do not care for the baby which survives an abortion attempt, and did an awful job of providing a non answer.

 

There were a few more clips of Walz evading questions that I saw which left me in bad taste. The Dems care about shredding the constitution into pieces and taking away the last few rights that people still have. 

 

Vance pandered about being raised by a single mother and grandmother, medical bills blah blah as well but at least his policy positions were solid.

 

I'm very surprised you bought into this charade. It makes me very worried for the future.