Page 135 of 228 FirstFirst ... 3585125133134135136137145185 ... LastLast
Results 1,341 to 1,350 of 2276

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1341
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    but you have to admit that drawing any sort of environmental equivalency between Alaska and California is myopic, at best
    You're not going to correct 50 million acres in 4 years, regardless of your budget. While fighting fires. Alaska does not have the santa anas or diablo winds. Nor the agricultural lands. Nor the severe droughts. There's a whole list of difficulties here that you don't have in Alaska.
    Some of that is true and a good point. They are different. But they both are areas that exhibit high chances of burn.

    We have millions of acres of beetle kill forest that often have 90% of the forest full of dead wood stacked on itself. This affected our area as I grew up. It is a tinder keg. The only reason it is not a high risk is the lack of people and structural damage - and that they have active burn plans in place in addition to educating home owners to clear the surrounding land for burn control. They have to be very aggressive due to the lack of ability to fight a fire, which is something California doesn't have. We still lose over 500,000 acres a year fairly often.

    The State of Alaska is responsible for managing controlled burns on Federal Land, they work with the federal government (BLM) and have an extensive plan, and have had for decades. Also they have high levels of education in place. So stating that they can not do anything about it is false. Alaska has the highest portion of federally owned land out of any of the states, well it is larger than any of the other states, they own an area larger than Texas. In addition to having the largest amount of land, and the smallest population per square mile. I lived in that area, so I know it best as a comparison, and how aggressive they are in fire control and education. That includes telling home owners to have large burn areas around their houses, like what is being proposed in the link right here:

    Oh and FYI, nearly every politician 'NOW' in the state runs on a platform of implementing fire management practices. The state just dropped a twelfth of Alaska's entire budget on a five year fire prevention program.
    http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...901-story.html
    FTFY.

    They JUST, as in, this September, 2 months ago, did this. After the report, from February. With such a long history of poor management, I think it is fair to knock them for it. Why did it take so friggen long?

    There is no reason for these massive, deadly and costly forest fires in California except that forest management is so poor," Trump tweeted. "Billions of dollars are given each year, with so many lives lost, all because of gross mismanagement of the forests.
    Billions given over decades. Lives lost over decades.

    It isn't as if these fires are new. The problem has been there forever, before people were there. If they had done the work 20 or 30 years ago, consistently, it wouldn't be a problem now. If you want some one to blame, as you seem to, it is past Californian administration of this problem.

    Why 4 years? If we want to talk myopic... Alaska knows they have 30 years of huge potential fires left due to this, with the amount of deadwood. This popped up in the late 1980s, when I was growing up there. They put the plan into place then. California has always had these problems. The plants and animals are adapted to it. But they still didn't do some of the things that are desperately needed.

    Yours argument was, and correct me if I am wrong, that: Trump was wrong to knock California for not addressing the problem in the past. And that he is a bad man for not saying something you wanted him to say in a tweet, and because of that fuck him and fuck everyone who supports him.

    My argument is that, if Alaska can have had a plan in place for decades, with controlled burns and education, WTF can't California have one?

    The problem is still how it is handled and managed on the state level, and since I know little ol' backwards AK can do it, why didn't progressive California do it? The answer is not the federal government is blocking them - because Alaska does it just fine. It is that they didn't do it until now.

    It's right in your quote ffs, you know the part you didn't bold.
    I included it deliberately Steve, since that is part of the problem. I understand that. I am not going to hide it or pretend it doesn't exist to make my point or to paint a better picture for my argument. As I showed above, and it was part of my point, Alaska can work with the federal government to make this work. I also linked to the study, which you seemed to not have read as I predicted, that would have detailed items that would have strongly supported Trump's position. And mine.

    But lets look at your words:

    "Just remember that on November 10th 2018, the President of the United States took time to pander to his base about how "mismanaged" California is due to large forest fires. He didn't mention the 200,000 people who have been evacuated and displaced due to the fires. He didn't mention the people who have lost their lives. He didn't mention the amazing fire crews who have been working around the clock in dangerous terrain to stop the fires."
    But seriously, fuck this guy and a big fat fuck you if you support him.
    Trump also said:

    More than 4,000 are fighting the Camp and Woolsey Fires in California that have burned over 170,000 acres. Our hearts are with those fighting the fires, the 52,000 who have evacuated, and the families of the 11 who have died. The destruction is catastrophic. God Bless them all.

    * Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 10, 2018
    So, yeah, he did. You are quite solidly wrong, and really can't spin out of it.

    I can make my point while including a full picture, and you made a point by either being ignorant or excluding information.

    if there's something you can know nothing about and pipe up as an "expert" you're the easiest bet in town
    Now that you have bitched about something the president didn't say, as a required virtue signal, but in fact he did, do we really need your judgement on who is an expert at something they don't know anything about?

    You started this reply because you make these absolutely horrid proclamations on here:
    ....and a big fat fuck you if you support him.
    to anybody who comes onto this forum, and you are either ignorant or deliberately omitting information so you can insult them.

    If a random guy comes on here, you know what, there is a 50% chance you just insulted him. Based on your misrepresentation of the facts, your feelings, and your need to virtue signal on this little forum.

    It seems like you and Gordon are happy chasing people off of here by insulting a large portion of the political spectrum. I suggest not making BS claims in the first place - and to respect others. It might be a nice change for once.

    Small addition: To be clear, my position is Trump is correct to bash California for years of mismanagement, if tacky and just plain mouth vomit like normal. And also he did say the things almost exactly the things your little virtue signaling self said he needed to do. In both of those areas your initial comment was incorrect.
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-14-2018 at 10:08 AM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  2. #1342
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Paypalled Gordon. Did you read it or just copy it over? If so, can you copy out the relative text in a quote?
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  3. #1343
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    Gordon links a lot, so not sure which one got walled off. But the last article he posted was the Washington Post. I think the relevant quote section would be here:

    Rep. Steve King, the newly reelected Iowa Republican with a history of incendiary comments about race and immigration, dared a conservative magazine to show evidence that he had called immigrants *dirt.*

    *Just release the full tape,* King, who eked out a victory last week despite affiliations with white nationalists, told the Weekly Standard*s online managing editor Saturday on Twitter. Days earlier, the magazine reported that King had made an inflammatory joke about immigrants.

    The Weekly Standard released the recording * a two-minute audio in which King can be heard bantering with a handful of supporters at the back of an Iowa restaurant during a campaign stop on Nov. 5, the magazine reported.
    Days after Rubenstein*s story was published, King and the Weekly Standard engaged in a public Twitter fight over what he actually meant.

    The Weekly Standard has joined the HuffPost *at the bottom of the lying journalistic gutter,* the congressman tweeted in the wee morning hours Friday.

    To which Stephen Hayes, the magazine*s editor in chief, replied: *The Weekly Standard remains, proudly, a reporting-driven conservative journal of opinion. * There are no lies, willful or otherwise. * Our reporter wouldn*t focus on your bigotry if you weren*t a bigot.*
    EDIT: WaPo seems to allow so many articles per month for free, so it's likely that you've just exceeded your current allotment. You may want to purchase the subscription.

  4. #1344
    the funniest part is that king claimed he never said it, and then they were like, oh yeah, here is the tape. get fucked. mental note: get fucked needs to be used WAY more often, esp to the faces of republican politicians who know they are lying.



    really, maybe the theme of this thread for me isn't republican policies based on racism.

    its that trump supporting conservatives are either willfully lying, or morons. you did not respond to the two major lies that trump spouted. #1 being that trump can change how the land is managed tomorrow if he wants to it is well within his power and #2, its still not forest management. because its not a forest. trumps tweet has zero merit based on these two fundamental lies. lies you are trying to defend with nonsense. there is no subtle fire prevention policy discussion to be had when trump was 100% full of bullshit. it started as bullshit, still is bullshit, and no amount of trying to dress it up is gonna make it anything other than bullshit. trump isn't a misunderstood genius. hes just an idiot.

    also the TSI has not increased.

    willfully lying, or morons. i don't know which is worse.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 11-14-2018 at 11:21 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  5. #1345
    fun facts:

    matt drudge deleted all his tweets.
    fox news has not tweeted in 4 days.

    i honestly have no idea why but i wouldnt doubt that it has to do with mueller.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  6. #1346
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    you did not respond to the two major lies that trump spouted. #1 being that trump can change how the land is managed tomorrow if he wants to it is well within his power and #2, its still not forest management. because its not a forest. trumps tweet has zero merit based on these two fundamental lies.
    It is a tweet, not a policy decision. Yikes man. "Major Lies" blah de blah. If this is "Major", then Hillary asking people to take off 'Top Secret' on the top of a document so they fax it must mean she needs a quartering by horse, and her house sticken from the official records, and we never use her name again in public. Lets try to be relative at least, eh? Or just keep up the trolling when it works in your favor? Lets make everything super drama when Bad Orange Man does it? Wow, so insightful and beneficial to all arguments.

    More non beneficial commentary from you Gordon. Why?

    It seems like you still incorrectly think Trump is a dictator. He is just a president. And that he gets into all the little minute problem this country has with some god like power, and if something is wrong he can just fix it instantly. He doesn't, obviously. On one hand you seem to basically think he is too stupid to tie his shoes, but on he other hand so smart and powerful he can fix decades of mismanagement by a state with the swing of a pen, no congressional over site. Just as a reminder - Congress writes the budget. The President signs it or vetoes it. There is your second grade lesson in our government for the day. But hey, lets ignore that and act as if you have a point or anything of value to bring up. You don't, and seem to demand an answer to your own ignorant premise. Again. As if we have to answer. All of your replies could be boiled down to "Have you stopped beating your wife yet Gordon?" as to the quality level they add to the mix.

    Have you?

    Wait - on topic, the US Gov gives the BLM money to spend in California. California doesn't do things like burn management or logging where it would be appropriate or helpful. California didn't put in large firebreaks around towns that could use it. These reasons are often due to politics and pressure groups in California. The president doesn't, NOR SHOULD, tell California how to do their job.

    Unless that is your point. You want him to tell California how to manage their state? Is that your preferred option? Really?

    The problem is historic - as in, they have had decades to deal with it. This is how dried wood and related debris build up. That would not be something our 2 years in president would be able to fix overnight. As Steve and others have correctly put, this isn't a 4 year fix. It was a 20 year fix 30 years ago. The current management budget is being used up because the fires are getting worse, namely because they didn't do proper management in the past and there are decades worth of dead wood in some of these areas. Also people are building too close to areas that can be affected by fires. Our roads are cleared extra wide in Alaska partially as a fire break actually.

    So, Trump should tell California how to manage their land, and should have been for the last 30 years. Great point Gordon.

    #2 - not even worth discussing. Semantics is all you have, and you are ignoring the part of California that does have trees (it doesn't all look like Steve's backyard), isn't smartly logged, and does still, and this might be new to you, catch on fire. This is ineffective trolling. Try harder next time.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  7. #1347
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Rep. Steve King,
    Well, sounds like he need to go. No problem there - see ya.

    Here is some whataboutism for ya: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ent-unpunished

    Question for Gordon - only Republicans, or everyone who is a bag of dicks, no matter their party?
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  8. #1348
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    It is a tweet, not a policy decision. Yikes man. "Major Lies" blah de blah. If this is "Major", then Hillary asking people to take off 'Top Secret' on the top of a document so they fax it must mean she needs a quartering by horse, and her house sticken from the official records, and we never use her name again in public. Lets try to be relative at least, eh? Or just keep up the trolling when it works in your favor? Lets make everything super drama when Bad Orange Man does it? Wow, so insightful and beneficial to all arguments.

    More non beneficial commentary from you Gordon. Why?

    It seems like you still incorrectly think Trump is a dictator. He is just a president. And that he gets into all the little minute problem this country has with some god like power, and if something is wrong he can just fix it instantly. He doesn't, obviously. On one hand you seem to basically think he is too stupid to tie his shoes, but on he other hand so smart and powerful he can fix decades of mismanagement by a state with the swing of a pen, no congressional over site. Just as a reminder - Congress writes the budget. The President signs it or vetoes it. There is your second grade lesson in our government for the day. But hey, lets ignore that and act as if you have a point or anything of value to bring up. You don't, and seem to demand an answer to your own ignorant premise. Again. As if we have to answer. All of your replies could be boiled down to "Have you stopped beating your wife yet Gordon?" as to the quality level they add to the mix.

    Have you?

    Wait - on topic, the US Gov gives the BLM money to spend in California. California doesn't do things like burn management or logging where it would be appropriate or helpful. California didn't put in large firebreaks around towns that could use it. These reasons are often due to politics and pressure groups in California. The president doesn't, NOR SHOULD, tell California how to do their job.

    Unless that is your point. You want him to tell California how to manage their state? Is that your preferred option? Really?

    The problem is historic - as in, they have had decades to deal with it. This is how dried wood and related debris build up. That would not be something our 2 years in president would be able to fix overnight. As Steve and others have correctly put, this isn't a 4 year fix. It was a 20 year fix 30 years ago. The current management budget is being used up because the fires are getting worse, namely because they didn't do proper management in the past and there are decades worth of dead wood in some of these areas. Also people are building too close to areas that can be affected by fires. Our roads are cleared extra wide in Alaska partially as a fire break actually.

    So, Trump should tell California how to manage their land, and should have been for the last 30 years. Great point Gordon.

    #2 - not even worth discussing. Semantics is all you have, and you are ignoring the part of California that does have trees (it doesn't all look like Steve's backyard), isn't smartly logged, and does still, and this might be new to you, catch on fire. This is ineffective trolling. Try harder next time.
    if you want to have a thread on forest, scrub forest, and desert management policies ... by all means ... lets do that. there is a new thread button at the top of the page.


    but this conversation about trump's tweet. which is, still, 100% bullshit. trump is attempting to tie liberal leaning California politics, with forest fire management, in order to convince folks that non-existent trump based policies will be better for them. its a conflation of absurdity that your 4 year old can see through.

    this is 100% bullshit.

    its actually not even worth discussing, its just bullshit. and you move on with your day.

    if you want to talk about land management policy, trump's tweet was not a place to start.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  9. #1349
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    but this conversation about trump's tweet. which is, still, 100% bullshit. trump is attempting to tie liberal leaning California politics, with forest fire management, in order to convince folks that non-existent trump based policies will be better for them.
    That was a far better reply than normal Gordon - thanks! Good to see you are making an effort. I agree with the bolded area, he is doing exactly that as I see it.

    Though - what IS California's past political choices on forest fire management? Well, not to do burns, not to log, and not to go heavy on fire brakes. Not to do much management at all. Oh yeah, to blame Global Warming, like Governor Brownstone just did. These or the policies they do enact, and have for decades. That is why it is getting worse.

    Trump's doesn't actually set forest fire management policy. He could I guess. But to think HE has some magic Trump Golden Fire Management Policy he is trying to sell is pure misdirection. I mean, even you say it is non-existent. All agree to that. Did you have a point there? Not sure if you do. Other states do have plans, the BLM does, and they have had these in place for decades. What they do differently works better than what California is doing.

    Or do you think California is doing it right? That their internal politics made for the right choices here? This is how the rest of the US should follow, not logging, not doing controlled burns?

    Which is the best in your opinion Gordon? California or everybody else? I mean, Trump. California or Trump? Because he really seems to be the center of your universe.

    You know what California is doing though? In fact, I posted a report FROM California TO California about what they should be doing, and were not. Why? Their political policies had been wrong, and they needed to address them.

    Yes, California Politics on fire management failed. They know it. Steve showed the link that they knew it and they are trying to fix it now, finally.

    So the only one who doesn't seem to know it, between Trump, California, Steve, you and I, is you Gordon.

    But nevermind, blame Trump. Or better yet, a tweet.

    Trump is your Troll Gordon. He fucking owns you.
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-14-2018 at 12:24 PM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  10. #1350
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    Well, sounds like he need to go. No problem there - see ya.

    Here is some whataboutism for ya: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ent-unpunished

    Question for Gordon - only Republicans, or everyone who is a bag of dicks, no matter their party?
    Not Gordon here, but personally I would like to see more accountability for bad apples in both parties. That doesn't mean automatically throw out anyone for one gross statement, but more punishments in the moment that come from the body of Congress. I do not think the polarization of the voting body has the ability to throw out a bad apple (See Bob Menendez and Duncan Hunter, presently). Everyone that can be shown to be a bag of dicks by the majority should get punished and continued bad behavior should get you thrown out. The house and senate ethics panels should mean something, but they can't be under the control of partisans for the sake of scoring "my side" victories. Sadly, I don't see a clear path to punishing swamp dwellers in the current climate because everyone is trying to score for their side first.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •