I do have a problem with that and so should you. Any intelligent person realizes his parade has nothing to do with the military and only goes to fuel his narcissistic ego. If he wants to take care of the military then fix the fucking VA and give them their benefits. Or take the millions of dollars wasted on a fucking parade and pay them a bonus.
Anything else is an embarrassment and anyone who supports is an embarrassment.
Funny, I thought the Stuttering Clusterfucj swore he’d take care of the VA issues.
Btw, how is this feeding Trump’s ego? Did he build the military himself?
I’ve never seen a military parade in this country and am frankly looking forward to it. Nothing wrong with being proud of them and showing our support (unless you despise America, that is).
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...ve-Lost-Thursday-s-Good-News?detail=emaildkre When Even Fox & Friends Mocks Your Stupid Parade Idea, You Know You've Lost:Thursday's Good News
By GoodNewsRoundup
Thursday Feb 08, 2018 · 4:00 AM PST
Everyone Is Mocking Trump’s Parade Idea (even Fox & Friends!)
Could Fox News kill the military parade?
By GoodNewsRoundup
Thursday Feb 08, 2018 · 4:00 AM PST
Everyone Is Mocking Trump’s Parade Idea (even Fox & Friends!)
Could Fox News kill the military parade?
“I don’t know. It seems like a waste of money,” said “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade on Wednesday morning.
Later in the morning, retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News strategic analyst, blasted the idea in a chat with host Bill Hemmer. After Hemmer took a shot at the media for comparing a U.S. military parade to similar spectacles in Russia and North Korea — and pointing out that the model is non-authoritarian France — Peters said: “Bill, I served in the military for almost 22 years, enlisted man and officer. Let me tell you: I value our tradition of civilian control of the military. . . . I don’t like the image of heavy weapons parading through our streets and the streets of American cities. . . . We would throw the training schedules out the window.”
Moving right ahead, retired Gen. Jack Keane summed up his feelings this way: “We don’t parade. We train and we fight, all right?” he told host Jon Scott. Jennifer Griffin, Fox News’s national security correspondent, appeared on air at least twice Wednesday afternoon to note that Pentagon officials had responded with a “collective eye-roll,” and had initially regarded the whole idea as a joke. Military brass, said Griffin, have “much more pressing issues” in front of them than “planning a parade.”
Shep Smith: Give Trump 'little mini replicas' of tanks instead of paradeLater in the morning, retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News strategic analyst, blasted the idea in a chat with host Bill Hemmer. After Hemmer took a shot at the media for comparing a U.S. military parade to similar spectacles in Russia and North Korea — and pointing out that the model is non-authoritarian France — Peters said: “Bill, I served in the military for almost 22 years, enlisted man and officer. Let me tell you: I value our tradition of civilian control of the military. . . . I don’t like the image of heavy weapons parading through our streets and the streets of American cities. . . . We would throw the training schedules out the window.”
Moving right ahead, retired Gen. Jack Keane summed up his feelings this way: “We don’t parade. We train and we fight, all right?” he told host Jon Scott. Jennifer Griffin, Fox News’s national security correspondent, appeared on air at least twice Wednesday afternoon to note that Pentagon officials had responded with a “collective eye-roll,” and had initially regarded the whole idea as a joke. Military brass, said Griffin, have “much more pressing issues” in front of them than “planning a parade.”
Fox News host Shep Smith on Wednesday mocked President Trump’s request for a military parade, saying he could instead be given plastic replicas of military equipment.
His comments came after Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin reported that she’s heard from military officials that they have “more pressing and important issues on their plates, and planning a parade is not one of them.”
“He could go see the tanks at a military base if he wanted to,” Smith responded.
“Or they could give him replicas, little mini replicas. I mean, he wants to see what he has,” he added.
"You can get the little plastic ones and lay them out on the table and say ‘here you go.' "
D.C. politicians to Trump on military parade: 'Tanks but No Tanks!'His comments came after Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin reported that she’s heard from military officials that they have “more pressing and important issues on their plates, and planning a parade is not one of them.”
“He could go see the tanks at a military base if he wanted to,” Smith responded.
“Or they could give him replicas, little mini replicas. I mean, he wants to see what he has,” he added.
"You can get the little plastic ones and lay them out on the table and say ‘here you go.' "
“Thanks but No Tanks!" That's what the D.C. Council, Washington's local legislative body, had to say about President Trump's plans to host a military celebration in the nation's capital.
Much of Congress is not on board with Trump's paradeRepublican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, also a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was not enthusiastic about Trump's idea for a parade.
"It hadn't been a priority at all," he told CNN. "If it would save money not to do it, we probably ought to look at that."
Lawmakers balk at potential cost of Trump’s military parade"It hadn't been a priority at all," he told CNN. "If it would save money not to do it, we probably ought to look at that."
Durbin wrote a letter to Defense Secretary James Mattis requesting an explanation on how much a military parade would cost taxpayers, which Democratic Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan, Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Patrick Leahy of Vermont also signed.
“At a time of war, with American service members serving in harm’s way, such a parade seems to be inappropriate and wasteful,” the senators wrote.
This Is A Bad Idea,' Retired Army General Says Of Trump's Call For Military Parade“At a time of war, with American service members serving in harm’s way, such a parade seems to be inappropriate and wasteful,” the senators wrote.
retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who served during Operation Iraqi Freedom, says Trump’s idea is “not about the military.”
“This is about assuaging a fragile ego that we’ve got with this commander in chief,” Eaton tells Here & Now‘s Robin Young.
'Napoleon in the making': Trump's military parade plan sparks backlash“This is about assuaging a fragile ego that we’ve got with this commander in chief,” Eaton tells Here & Now‘s Robin Young.
Democratic lawmakers leaped to pillory Trump's plan as an "idiot" and "authoritarian" idea from a "Napoleon in the making." Meanwhile support was thin on the ground, even among Trump's advocates in Congress.
A sign of weakness’: Lindsey Graham thumps Trump for ‘cheesy’ military parade
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...ve-Lost-Thursday-s-Good-News?detail=emaildkre When Even Fox & Friends Mocks Your Stupid Parade Idea, You Know You've Lost:Thursday's Good News
By GoodNewsRoundup
Thursday Feb 08, 2018 · 4:00 AM PST
Everyone Is Mocking Trump’s Parade Idea (even Fox & Friends!)
Could Fox News kill the military parade?“I don’t know. It seems like a waste of money,” said “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade on Wednesday morning.Shep Smith: Give Trump 'little mini replicas' of tanks instead of parade
Later in the morning, retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News strategic analyst, blasted the idea in a chat with host Bill Hemmer. After Hemmer took a shot at the media for comparing a U.S. military parade to similar spectacles in Russia and North Korea — and pointing out that the model is non-authoritarian France — Peters said: “Bill, I served in the military for almost 22 years, enlisted man and officer. Let me tell you: I value our tradition of civilian control of the military. . . . I don’t like the image of heavy weapons parading through our streets and the streets of American cities. . . . We would throw the training schedules out the window.”
Moving right ahead, retired Gen. Jack Keane summed up his feelings this way: “We don’t parade. We train and we fight, all right?” he told host Jon Scott. Jennifer Griffin, Fox News’s national security correspondent, appeared on air at least twice Wednesday afternoon to note that Pentagon officials had responded with a “collective eye-roll,” and had initially regarded the whole idea as a joke. Military brass, said Griffin, have “much more pressing issues” in front of them than “planning a parade.”
Fox News host Shep Smith on Wednesday mocked President Trump’s request for a military parade, saying he could instead be given plastic replicas of military equipment.D.C. politicians to Trump on military parade: 'Tanks but No Tanks!'
His comments came after Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin reported that she’s heard from military officials that they have “more pressing and important issues on their plates, and planning a parade is not one of them.”
“He could go see the tanks at a military base if he wanted to,” Smith responded.
“Or they could give him replicas, little mini replicas. I mean, he wants to see what he has,” he added.
"You can get the little plastic ones and lay them out on the table and say ‘here you go.' "
“Thanks but No Tanks!" That's what the D.C. Council, Washington's local legislative body, had to say about President Trump's plans to host a military celebration in the nation's capital.Much of Congress is not on board with Trump's paradeRepublican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, also a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was not enthusiastic about Trump's idea for a parade.Lawmakers balk at potential cost of Trump’s military parade
"It hadn't been a priority at all," he told CNN. "If it would save money not to do it, we probably ought to look at that."
Durbin wrote a letter to Defense Secretary James Mattis requesting an explanation on how much a military parade would cost taxpayers, which Democratic Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan, Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Patrick Leahy of Vermont also signed.This Is A Bad Idea,' Retired Army General Says Of Trump's Call For Military Parade
“At a time of war, with American service members serving in harm’s way, such a parade seems to be inappropriate and wasteful,” the senators wrote.
retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who served during Operation Iraqi Freedom, says Trump’s idea is “not about the military.”'Napoleon in the making': Trump's military parade plan sparks backlash
“This is about assuaging a fragile ego that we’ve got with this commander in chief,” Eaton tells Here & Now‘s Robin Young.
Democratic lawmakers leaped to pillory Trump's plan as an "idiot" and "authoritarian" idea from a "Napoleon in the making." Meanwhile support was thin on the ground, even among Trump's advocates in Congress.A sign of weakness’: Lindsey Graham thumps Trump for ‘cheesy’ military parade
Suck a dick miserable Liberal w-thumbs!^
OOPS!
Responding to an Obama-era scandal in which veterans died waiting
for doctor’s appointments, Mr. Trump signed the Department of Veterans
Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017 "it will make
sure that the scandal we suffered so recently never, ever happens again.”
You really need to come out of your safe space more often.
Right back at ya, Mr. 77,000 brain dead posts.:bigfinger:madasshol:trx-smly0:Countdown^^
Torture Shush()*
Right back at ya, Mr. 77,000 brain dead posts.:bigfinger:madasshol:trx-smly0:Countdown^^
2020 will be even sweeter w-thumbs!^
No it was broken a long time before Obama. The point is he didn't give a fuck aboutSo according to your flawed logic- Obama broke the VA and drumph fixed it. Got it.hno:
the Vets and some died because of it. Maybe if he would have taken some of that 1.7
billion he gave to his brothers in Iran and spent on those American soldiers instead of
terrorist they'd still be alive.
Wow you really do hate America don't you?
You're not worth it.So again by your flawed logic, drumph cares about the vets/military because he wants to throw a parade. Got it.
Further because I question his lunacy and suggested he actually take the millions he would waste on a parade and actually pay them a bonus, I hate America. Got it.ointer:
On Thursday, the White House sent out a fact sheet cheering Trump’s efforts to bring “urgently needed accountability and reform to the VA,” and the “tremendous progress” the administration has achieved in “a short period of time.” The efforts to date echo portions of a 10-point plan Trump issued during the campaign: Among other things, he said he would use presidential power to “remove and discipline the federal employees” who fail to help veterans, create a 24/7 hotline to deal with veterans’ complaints, and ensure that “every veteran has the choice to seek care at the VA or at a private service provider of their own choice.”
There’s been progress, veterans groups say, although some of it was underway before Trump took office. Other successes are attributable to the work of the relatively bipartisan House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs committees. “One of the few areas Congress has been productive has been on veterans,” says Allison Jaslow, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “And, of course, the president has benefited from that and has been able to sign some bills into law.”
Trump’s own accomplishments are more of a mixed bag. “His veterans stuff is not like the Wall,” says Joseph Chenelly, executive director of AMVets. “He’s not failing in our opinion.”
Let’s take a closer look at some of the changes since January.
An Obama holdover hired: Much to the surprise of veterans groups, Trump chose David Shulkin as secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs and tasked him with reforming what he once called “the most corrupt agency in the United States.” Shulkin, the only cabinet member to come from the Obama administration, had spent the previous two years overseeing the agency’s health care system as Undersecretary for Health. Trump’s transition team had considered “at least 100” candidates and even offered the job to former Air Force surgeon and Cleveland Clinic CEO Toby Cosgrove. (Cosgrove declined.) Veterans groups opposed other names under consideration—including Sarah Palin and Fox News contributor Pete Hegseth, a former CEO of Concerned Veterans of America, a Koch Brothers-backed group that aimed to privatize the VA health system.
A move toward more accountability: Trump gave Shulkin and future VA secretaries new authority when, in June, he signed into law legislation that facilitates the firing of employees who engage in misconduct and helps protect helps protect whistleblowers. This long-sought accountability law, viewed by Shulkin and other supporters as a step toward reforming the VA, followed years of scandals, including veterans dying while waiting for access to medical care.
The White House claims in its fact sheet that the new standards have led to the firing of 1,163 employees and suspension of 387 others as of November 7. Notably, in September, the VA fired Brian Hawkins, who served as director of the VA Medical Center in DC, a second time. He was first fired in July, three months after a scathing inspector general’s report found Hawkins had overseen hospitals beset by the “highest levels of chaos.” But an appeals board for federal employees delayed his removal, pending further review. (Now, if only he would demand more fiscal accountability from the Pentagon.)
More money—for some things: In May, the White House proposed a 6 percent increase in the VA budget, includes an increase of more than $13 billion for the agency’s “choice” program—which allows veterans to opt for private health coverage. Yet the proposal also slashed $3.6 billion in veteran benefits by, among other things, ending the Individual Unemployability program, which gives payments to disabled veterans struggling to find work as a result of injuries incurred during their service. Veterans groups slammed the proposal—one deemed it “dead on arrival,” and the VA eventually backed away from cutting the benefits.
That veterans hotline: In July 2016, Trump promised vets a “private White House hotline” to field their complaints 24 hours a day. He said he would even answer it himself if he had the chance. But it took months after Trump’s inauguration to get the initiative off the ground. The VA soft-launched the hotline in June at a cost of $190,000, according to Military Times, and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) wrote to the agency in October complaining that the line had logged more than 20,000 calls and was routing them to local VA offices—which are understaffed and “do not have the ability to address the additional casework in a timely manner.”
More access to private health insurance: During the campaign, Trump pledged to give vets the freedom to choose private medical providers, a move that would cost $100 billion by 2034 if not managed properly, according to a report by the Commission on Care established by Congress. During the now-infamous rally in Alabama, the one at which he criticized NFL players who knelt during the national anthem, Trump also said: “Can you imagine going to your doctor and having him say you’ll have to wait for 11 days? If I have to wait for two seconds, I would go crazy…And now they go, right outside, they go to a doctor in the area; we pay the bill, and it’s the least expensive thing we can do and we save everybody’s life and everybody’s happy.”
The Veterans Choice Program was established in 2014 in response a scandal in which government officials covered up extensive wait times at VA medical facilities. Vets are now allowed to seek private care if they live more than 40 miles from a VA clinic or have waited more than 30 days for an appointment. But the program doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll see a doctor faster. The Government Accountability Office found in a preliminary analysis that veterans referred through the choice program waited up to 81 days for routine care.
In August, Trump signed a $3.9 billion funding bill that gave the VA an extra $2.1 billion to maintain the choice program, hire more providers, and open 28 new medical facilities. But the bill was in response to an unforeseen budgetary shortfall that threatened services for veterans. When Congress approved this emergency funding, it was supposed to keep the choice program afloat through February 2018. But in September, the VA informed the Associated Press that the money may run out before year’s end.
A new ban on transgender troops: Last year, the Pentagon ended a ban on transgender people serving openly in the military. That changed in July, when Trump, in a sudden series of tweets, announced his intent to bar transgender service members “in any capacity in the U.S. military.” The move drew the ire of civil rights groups and transgender military personnel and veterans. Retired Army Col. Sheri Swokowski recently told Mother Jones she was shocked by the president’s tweets. “Today I’m the highest-ranking out trans veteran in the United States,” Swokowski says, “but I often look back and wonder how much better an officer, not to mention human being, I might have been had I been allowed to transition while serving.” A legal battle over Trump’s policy continues, leaving thousands of trans service members wondering what’s next.
The Forever GI Bill: On August 17, Trump signed legislation that gives veterans another $3 billion for educational assistance over 10 years. A combination of 18 different bills, Forever GI ends a 15-year expiration date for vets to take advantage of their benefits, allows spouses and children of service-members killed on duty to qualify, and extends tuition reimbursement to vets in the event their schools close. “That’s a pretty big win,” says AMVets’ Chenelly, “but 100 percent legislative.”
There’s been progress, veterans groups say, although some of it was underway before Trump took office. Other successes are attributable to the work of the relatively bipartisan House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs committees. “One of the few areas Congress has been productive has been on veterans,” says Allison Jaslow, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “And, of course, the president has benefited from that and has been able to sign some bills into law.”
Trump’s own accomplishments are more of a mixed bag. “His veterans stuff is not like the Wall,” says Joseph Chenelly, executive director of AMVets. “He’s not failing in our opinion.”
Let’s take a closer look at some of the changes since January.
An Obama holdover hired: Much to the surprise of veterans groups, Trump chose David Shulkin as secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs and tasked him with reforming what he once called “the most corrupt agency in the United States.” Shulkin, the only cabinet member to come from the Obama administration, had spent the previous two years overseeing the agency’s health care system as Undersecretary for Health. Trump’s transition team had considered “at least 100” candidates and even offered the job to former Air Force surgeon and Cleveland Clinic CEO Toby Cosgrove. (Cosgrove declined.) Veterans groups opposed other names under consideration—including Sarah Palin and Fox News contributor Pete Hegseth, a former CEO of Concerned Veterans of America, a Koch Brothers-backed group that aimed to privatize the VA health system.
A move toward more accountability: Trump gave Shulkin and future VA secretaries new authority when, in June, he signed into law legislation that facilitates the firing of employees who engage in misconduct and helps protect helps protect whistleblowers. This long-sought accountability law, viewed by Shulkin and other supporters as a step toward reforming the VA, followed years of scandals, including veterans dying while waiting for access to medical care.
The White House claims in its fact sheet that the new standards have led to the firing of 1,163 employees and suspension of 387 others as of November 7. Notably, in September, the VA fired Brian Hawkins, who served as director of the VA Medical Center in DC, a second time. He was first fired in July, three months after a scathing inspector general’s report found Hawkins had overseen hospitals beset by the “highest levels of chaos.” But an appeals board for federal employees delayed his removal, pending further review. (Now, if only he would demand more fiscal accountability from the Pentagon.)
More money—for some things: In May, the White House proposed a 6 percent increase in the VA budget, includes an increase of more than $13 billion for the agency’s “choice” program—which allows veterans to opt for private health coverage. Yet the proposal also slashed $3.6 billion in veteran benefits by, among other things, ending the Individual Unemployability program, which gives payments to disabled veterans struggling to find work as a result of injuries incurred during their service. Veterans groups slammed the proposal—one deemed it “dead on arrival,” and the VA eventually backed away from cutting the benefits.
That veterans hotline: In July 2016, Trump promised vets a “private White House hotline” to field their complaints 24 hours a day. He said he would even answer it himself if he had the chance. But it took months after Trump’s inauguration to get the initiative off the ground. The VA soft-launched the hotline in June at a cost of $190,000, according to Military Times, and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) wrote to the agency in October complaining that the line had logged more than 20,000 calls and was routing them to local VA offices—which are understaffed and “do not have the ability to address the additional casework in a timely manner.”
More access to private health insurance: During the campaign, Trump pledged to give vets the freedom to choose private medical providers, a move that would cost $100 billion by 2034 if not managed properly, according to a report by the Commission on Care established by Congress. During the now-infamous rally in Alabama, the one at which he criticized NFL players who knelt during the national anthem, Trump also said: “Can you imagine going to your doctor and having him say you’ll have to wait for 11 days? If I have to wait for two seconds, I would go crazy…And now they go, right outside, they go to a doctor in the area; we pay the bill, and it’s the least expensive thing we can do and we save everybody’s life and everybody’s happy.”
The Veterans Choice Program was established in 2014 in response a scandal in which government officials covered up extensive wait times at VA medical facilities. Vets are now allowed to seek private care if they live more than 40 miles from a VA clinic or have waited more than 30 days for an appointment. But the program doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll see a doctor faster. The Government Accountability Office found in a preliminary analysis that veterans referred through the choice program waited up to 81 days for routine care.
In August, Trump signed a $3.9 billion funding bill that gave the VA an extra $2.1 billion to maintain the choice program, hire more providers, and open 28 new medical facilities. But the bill was in response to an unforeseen budgetary shortfall that threatened services for veterans. When Congress approved this emergency funding, it was supposed to keep the choice program afloat through February 2018. But in September, the VA informed the Associated Press that the money may run out before year’s end.
A new ban on transgender troops: Last year, the Pentagon ended a ban on transgender people serving openly in the military. That changed in July, when Trump, in a sudden series of tweets, announced his intent to bar transgender service members “in any capacity in the U.S. military.” The move drew the ire of civil rights groups and transgender military personnel and veterans. Retired Army Col. Sheri Swokowski recently told Mother Jones she was shocked by the president’s tweets. “Today I’m the highest-ranking out trans veteran in the United States,” Swokowski says, “but I often look back and wonder how much better an officer, not to mention human being, I might have been had I been allowed to transition while serving.” A legal battle over Trump’s policy continues, leaving thousands of trans service members wondering what’s next.
The Forever GI Bill: On August 17, Trump signed legislation that gives veterans another $3 billion for educational assistance over 10 years. A combination of 18 different bills, Forever GI ends a 15-year expiration date for vets to take advantage of their benefits, allows spouses and children of service-members killed on duty to qualify, and extends tuition reimbursement to vets in the event their schools close. “That’s a pretty big win,” says AMVets’ Chenelly, “but 100 percent legislative.”
