Commentary
Ironically, as I use this commentary to call out a newspaper for it’s position I deem to be unfair to the Trump administration and especially Vice President Vance, Gallup released its latest polling revealing that the media hit another all-time low in public trust. Just 31 percent say they trust the media.
I often quote the editorial board and opinion columnists of the Wall Street Journal in my commentaries because they are thoughtful observations and, yes, because their view is similar to mine, but that isn’t so today.
Listening to a few of the network talking heads following the Oval Office back and forth between Ukraine President Zelenskyy and the double-teaming of President Trump and Vice President Vance, more than one sought to peg Russia’s Putin the winner.
One would have thought I was yelling at a referee having made a bad call against the Michigan Wolverines when I shouted my foolish disagreement at the TV. Putin may have enjoyed what happened in the White House, but he knows he didn’t win, because he knows President Trump.
But there it was in the editorial board’s weekend commentary, “Putin Wins an Oval Office Spectacle,” they stated, “the meeting was supposed to be progress toward an honorable peace in Ukraine, and in the event the winner was Russia’s Vladimir Putin.”
It’s obvious that the board has become too accustomed to the internationalist foreign policy of Wynken, Blynken and Nod – Joe Biden, Antony Blinken and Jake Sullivan – recalling Biden’s four decades of foreign policy failures and the missteps of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that Blinken and Sullivan brought to the Biden administration.
I am extremely disappointed with the editorial board’s decision to criticize Vice President Vance for his participation in the foray they described as a descension into “recriminations,” during which Vance interjected, appearing to defend “Trump’s diplomacy.” What’s wrong with that?
“Why did the Vice President try to provoke a public fight? Mr. Vance dressed down Mr. Zelenskyy as if he were a child late for dinner, claiming he hadn’t been grateful enough for U.S. aid,” they wrote. He had, but not in the Oval Office at that moment.
As if that weren’t enough, Journal editorial board member Holman W. Jenkens, Jr. found it necessary to level further criticism against Vance in his column on the following page, suggesting that “The most unnecessary intrusion was by the not-ready-for-prime-time Mr. Vance.”
Talk about disrespectfulness, Mr. Jenkins. I don’t recall your criticism of Vice President Harris, who could be seen seated or standing motionless when Biden was engaged in his ideological version of foreign policy. And I don’t recall your criticism of Harris bragging about the Afghan pullout in her Naval Academy speech.
I believe in the free press. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board and its columnists certainly have a right to their opinions, but in my small way I won’t hesitate to respond as I see fit, as I frequently do with the positions taken by columnist Peggy Noonan.
CNN’s Kaitlan Collins devoted about 10 minutes of airtime trying to get Secretary of State Marco Rubio to say something she could interpret as a comment not in support of remarks made by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy without success.
Rubio had proven himself to be well-versed during his February 16, 2025, appearance on CBS Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan when she attempted to draw him into a disagreement with remarks made by Vice President Vance regarding censorship at the Munich Security Conference, while “standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide.”
Although Brennan tried to interrupt him, she permitted Rubio to defend Vance’s remarks, informing her that free speech was not used to conduct a genocide.
Arizona’s Democrat Sen. Mark Kelly, who never comments on issues of significance, pathetically referred to the Oval Office discussion as “a gift” to Russia.
Vance the New Target?
Vice President Vance received a warm welcome speaking at the 20th Annual Catholic Prayer Breakfast, saying that he and his family pray for the ailing Pope Francis, and providing a little humor when he said, “Sometimes the bishops don’t like what I say,” and making it clear that the Trump administration will have “an open door” policy toward religious communities.”
On Saturday, however, when Vance and his wife and children were trying to enjoy skiing at Sugarbush Resort in Warren, Vermont, they faced angry protestors waving pride flags, pro-Ukraine posters, and anti-Vance signs, one reading “Vance is a traitor go ski in Russia.”
It seems that a Sugarbush employee tipped off skiers by revealing the Vance visit on the resort’s website.
Protestors were told to leave, and the Vance’s were relocated to a different location on the resort.
I continue to believe that Trump’s choice of Vance as his running mate was an excellent one.
May God continue to bless the United States of America.
