"Lt Col Vindman is to the TFG’s presidency as Col Oliver North was to the Regan presidency."
What the What? I think you are trying to say that Vindman would not be complicit in Trump's Ukraine abuses, while North was an active participant in Reagan's Iran Contra abuses. But that is not actually what you said.
"Lt Col Vindman is to the TFG’s presidency as Col Oliver North was to the Regan presidency."
What the What? I think you are trying to say that Vindman would not be complicit in Trump's Ukraine abuses, while North was an active participant in Reagan's Iran Contra abuses. But that is not actually what you said.
Vindman is a whistleblower who stepped up to expose Trump's misdeeds. And continues to be punished by the Republican establishment.
North is a miscreant who carried out Reagan's undercover misdeeds. And was later summoned before Congress to testify. He continues to be a fixture of the GOP.
These two National Security advisors played very different roles in the two administrations. Vindman upheld the law, North broke it.
William Barr played the same role in the Republican Trump Ukraine scandal as he did in the Republican Reagan Bush Iran Contra scandal. Having helped clean up one mess, he was brought to clean up another.
“Quite the contrast Lt Col Vindman is to the TFG’s presidency as Col Oliver North was to the Regan presidency.“ Wow, it’s taking me forever to figure this out. I finally got it. Vindman is a huge contrast to North. Because of the word “as,” that makes one jump to the knee-jerk conclusion you’re comparing them. *whew*
Vindman is a huge contrast to North. A refreshing contrast. An extreme contrast. Got it.
Thanks Roland, I'm not a professional writer, obviously! But I remember writing a lot of compare and contrasting papers way back when. The contrasting of people, events, issues, I always found to be better at learning and teaching than comparisons. I didn't think so many would misinterpret my meaning or intention. That alone is pretty interesting to me now.
"Lt Col Vindman is to the TFG’s presidency as Col Oliver North was to the Regan presidency."
What the What? I think you are trying to say that Vindman would not be complicit in Trump's Ukraine abuses, while North was an active participant in Reagan's Iran Contra abuses. But that is not actually what you said.
Vindman is a whistleblower who stepped up to expose Trump's misdeeds. And continues to be punished by the Republican establishment.
North is a miscreant who carried out Reagan's undercover misdeeds. And was later summoned before Congress to testify. He continues to be a fixture of the GOP.
These two National Security advisors played very different roles in the two administrations. Vindman upheld the law, North broke it.
William Barr played the same role in the Republican Trump Ukraine scandal as he did in the Republican Reagan Bush Iran Contra scandal. Having helped clean up one mess, he was brought to clean up another.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/28/opinion/trump-russia-iran-contra.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/08/trump-ukraine-call-impeachment-vindman/619617/
Ted did use the word “contrast”.
Thanks Eric!
“Quite the contrast Lt Col Vindman is to the TFG’s presidency as Col Oliver North was to the Regan presidency.“ Wow, it’s taking me forever to figure this out. I finally got it. Vindman is a huge contrast to North. Because of the word “as,” that makes one jump to the knee-jerk conclusion you’re comparing them. *whew*
Vindman is a huge contrast to North. A refreshing contrast. An extreme contrast. Got it.
Thanks Roland, I'm not a professional writer, obviously! But I remember writing a lot of compare and contrasting papers way back when. The contrasting of people, events, issues, I always found to be better at learning and teaching than comparisons. I didn't think so many would misinterpret my meaning or intention. That alone is pretty interesting to me now.