While we have been cataloging the media desperately attempting to completely rewrite the Kamala Harris history of (non)accomplishments, the press now faces a newer and tougher challenge–the quixotic decision (I intentionally do not call it “hers”) to insert Tim Walz as the running mate, which presents a completely different problem with historical rewrites.
Walz has quite a problematic political record; from his permissiveness during the 2020 riots to his declaring the state can take custody of minors over the issue of gender alteration surgery, his is an extremist’s resume. But, in addition to this is his personal story, specifically his military service in the National Guard and his overselling of his record. The knee-jerk reaction in the press to protect any Democrat is leading – once again – to problems with their ethics, as Bloomberg News has discovered.
In the “Businessweek Daily” newsletter, Joshua Green penned a glowing profile of Walz that ran into the very type of problems you encounter by putting too much faith (read: “any”) in a politician. In the attempt to paint the picture of a man who should be warmly accepted by everyone, Green failed to listen to his own internal voice. As he began to unfurl the Walz biography, he mentioned the very caution he failed to heed: “Tim Walz, comes across as entirely—almost suspiciously—normal.”
Oh Josh, if only you had listened…
Green ran headlong into the problem with Walz burnishing his accomplishments during his 20+-plus years of service in the National Guard. Over the years, there have been inconsistencies concerning his rank, how he departed just ahead of deployment, as well as how and where he served in the war effort. Bonchie covered some of these issues, and the problems emanating from this for the press, specifically in this Bloomberg piece.
Green had detailed that Walz had spent time in Iraq, when his actual service record defies this claim. (It is not made entirely clear if this had been an error on the part of Green, or if he was given this information by Walz/his team.) Many people call out the piece for inaccuracy; it needed to be edited to correct that Walz had in fact been stationed in Italy at the time, and therefore had not been close to the action. As such, it is even in dispute if he could claim to have been attached to Operation Enduring Freedom:
This is the problem when trying to prop up a politician with a spotty record.@Bloomberg falsely promoted the Tim Walz service record and had to correct things when called out. pic.twitter.com/nAyVoVQ8mu
— Lie-Able Sources (@LieAbleSources) August 8, 2024
Over an hour after publication, Bloomberg added a Correction note:
— 🌭 beastie wiener 🌭 (@GayLittleWiener) August 7, 2024
Following this alteration, people found more things wrong with the piece. A section deeper in the piece discussed Democrats looking to bolster the party’s image by recruiting Iraq war vets to run for office, and Walz’ name was included as one of those courted at the time. After more complaints about this were lodged, Green went back and altered his piece a second time. The words “Iraq and Afghanistan” have now been struck from the piece, and Bloomberg was forced to issue a second Correction addendum to the column:
Then later another edit had to be made and a second correction had to be issued. pic.twitter.com/NVXAeKhzEq
— Lie-Able Sources (@LieAbleSources) August 8, 2024
This has been an enduring problem, and not just for Walz. From the time he launched his political career, he has touted his service in a fashion that did not align with the facts, as Jordan Schachtel noted. In one of his first mentions of his new political career from 2006, as published in The Atlantic, it was noted how Walz “just returned from fighting the war on terrorism.”
Walz personifies two of this year’s most interesting political trends. The midterm elections this fall will be the first in which a sizable number of veterans from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq run for Congress. Like Walz, nearly every one of them is a Democrat.
Woo, yeah – that has not aged well. Making this matter all the worse, Thursday is that puff piece in The Atlantic–penned by none other than the same Josh Green.
