"Mad Dog" Mattis Shuts Down Reporter Who Asks Why We Need a Military Parade
Elected Democrats and their liberal allies in the media recently lost their minds for at least the 385th time since the President Donald Trump took office 385 days ago due to reports that he had instructed the Pentagon to look into options for holding a special parade to honor the military.
According to Fox News, the topic of military parades came up during the daily briefing at the White House on Wednesday when respected former Marine general and Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis joined press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders to speak to reporters about his request for an increased defense budget.
“We’re all aware in this country of the president’s affection and respect for the military,” stated Mattis in response to a question about the potential parade. “We’ve been putting together some options. We’ll send them up to the White House for decision.”
According to The Gateway Pundit, that response led to a follow-up question from NBC reporter Hallie Jackson, who asked, “You just laid out the argument for fully funding the military, why you think every dollar counts … So why divert time, energy, financial resources to the planning of a parade as the president has asked?”
“I think what my responsibility is to make certain I lay out the strategy and make the argument for the oversight of Congress to make the determination of fully funding us,” replied Mattis, according to The Hill.
“As far as the parade goes, again, the president’s respect, his fondness for the military, I think is reflected in him asking for these options,” he added.
You can watch Mattis deal with the reporter’s question here:
It is pretty rich to hear liberals suddenly expressing concern about costs and how they pertain to the budget and deficits given their near silence on the issue while the national debt was doubled under the prior administration, but I digress.
Mattis was absolutely correct to point out how well-known it is that the president has a level of “affection,” “respect” and “fondness” for the military, which is why he has sought options for a parade to honor them — not to honor himself like some third-world authoritarian dictator, as some liberals have attempted to frame it.
Furthermore, what all of these suddenly-worried-about-budget-funding liberals have overlooked is that a special parade to honor the military doesn’t even have to be fully funded by the Pentagon, as private funds could conceivably be raised to help cut costs.
For example, check out this article from UPI in November of 1995 about the estimated half million people who turned out to view a special parade down Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue featuring 25,000 marching veterans on Veterans Day to honor the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II.
That parade almost didn’t take place due to a lack of funding, as per the organizer, but was saved by a massive donation from none other than … you guessed it, New York real estate magnate Donald J. Trump, who donated $200,000 of his own money and helped raise an additional $300,000 to fund the parade.
“This donation is the single most important thing I’ve ever done,” stated Trump at the time. “This is more important than all of my buildings and my casinos. This is my way of saying thank you to all the men and women in the armed services who have made it possible for me to become a success. Without them freedom and liberty would be gone.”
So there you have it folks, straight from Trump’s mouth in 1995 as well as his current secretary of Defense — the president loves and respects the military and wants to honor them for their sacrifices that have helped keep us all free, no matter the cost. The faux concern from liberals about budgetary issues, of all things, is telling in that they don’t feel the same way as Trump in regard to honoring the military.
Please share this on Facebook and Twitter so everyone can see what Defense Secretary Mattis had to say when reporters questioned Trump’s request for a parade to honor the military.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.