“So Satan and Santa fought to a gentle draw,” Esquire’s Charles P. Pierce wrote of the VP debate. “Stylistically, it was an obvious mismatch. Satan is a very slick, very disciplined liar, so well-versed in strategic mendacity that it has become a reflex strong enough for him to pass as a very believable replicant.”
Tim Walz probably wouldn’t mind being likened to Jolly Old St. Nick. But J.D. Vance, the staunchly conservative Catholic convert, doubtless would blow a gasket at any comparison to Old Scratch, who “disguises himself as an angel of light,” the Good Book warns.
Vance, Trump’s snarling sycophant and a Holocaust denier’s texting buddy, faked it as the nice guy next door – Wally Cleaver, all grown up.
I don’t know if Trump told Vance to try the charm offensive or if Vance freelanced the con. But his performance proved that he is an existential threat to our democracy equal to Trump, precisely because Vance “is a very slick, very disciplined liar.” Trump is a serial liar, too, but of the unhinged, pants-on-fire persuasion.
On CNN, Van Jones said Vance “lied the entire night,” warning that “Donald Trump is the gaslighter-in-chief and this is his loyal lieutenant who came out here to try to polish up the crazy, and I think Americans need to be very, very careful. This is a very, very deceptive guy.”
Before the debate, Jones posted on X, “At our shared alma mater Yale Law School, I used to have to debate people like J.D. Vance all the time – phony strivers who will lie and say anything to get ahead. They are hard to beat. Coach Walz will be constrained by his decency. Let’s see if a good, big-hearted man can beat a pretender with a high IQ but low integrity.”
As it turned out, Walz gave as good as he got. He notably nailed Vance on his refusal to acknowledge that Trump lost in 2020. But even so, Vance presented himself as the “more refined” of the two.
So here’s a question: Whose standard image is of “the manic ranter and raver at huge mass meetings and rallies”? Believe it or not, it’s the same guy who in staged private settings was a “consummate actor [who] presented quite a different image. There was no ranting and raving.”
What’s more, this same person “feigned humility. He projected sincerity. ... There were no histrionics.” And, he “presented himself as a reasonable and amenable advocate … keen to work for accommodation.”
Was he, in fact, as he presented himself? Was he humble, sincere, and reasonable? Or was it all an act?
For the answer, check out the web site History Extra and learn how Adolf Hitler, before he started World War II and murdered six million Jews, tried to dupe the Brits into believing he was “an angel of light.”
Voters, don’t be duped this fall.
--30--
| Tip Jars |
Comments
