#96 | Posted by visitor_

He was right, if only because Biden wouldn't have (and didn't) do any of the following that Trump did during his presidency:

Threatened to withhold federal funding: Trump repeatedly threatened to cut off federal aid to California for wildfire management and recovery efforts. In January 2019, he tweeted that he ordered FEMA to stop sending money to California "unless they get their act together."

Promoted misinformation: Trump consistently blamed California's wildfires on poor forest management while downplaying or denying the role of climate change. He suggested impractical solutions like raking forest floors, which experts criticized as reflecting a lack of understanding of wildfire science.

Politicized natural disasters: Trump used wildfire crises to attack California's Democratic leadership, particularly Governor Gavin Newsom, instead of focusing on collaborative solutions, which he continues to do this very day. This politicization distracted, and continues to distract, from effective wildfire preparedness efforts.

Delayed emergency responses: In 2020, Trump initially refused to grant California an emergency declaration to respond to deadly wildfires, taking days to publicly address the situation before eventually approving the declaration.

Despite these improvements, there are still fires. But that's California and the west in general. Natural disasters like wildfires require multi-layered risk mitigation strategies, acknowledging that while complete prevention isn't always possible, strategic preparedness can substantially minimize potential destruction.

Undermined climate action: By consistently denying the link between climate change and worsening wildfires, Trump hindered efforts to address root causes of increased fire risk in California.

By not actively opposing California's efforts and by supporting climate action, the Biden administration has allowed the state to make progress in its wildfire preparedness initiatives.

Are you unable to recognize that the current wildfires would have been worse without Governor Newsom's efforts and President Biden's support, which stands in stark contrast to Trump's approach?

#107

What's so obvious about it? Be specific.

#118

Now do almonds.

And 85% of the time, per link provided by LAMPY, the cause of the fires is human-based, either through arson or incompetentance (i.e., utility companies).

"Buh buh buh...muh Gavun!"

Crazy talk!
#124 | Posted by BellRinger

Indeed. Nice self own.

#126

How much of Texas is non-federal?

Why would the Federal government be responsible for building resevoir?
#128 | Posted by visitor_

It's their land. LOL

Would this fire be any different if it was started by lightning or Oprah's Cybertruck?
#130 | Posted by REDIAL

In terms of blame at the feet of the governor, that's all that matters. IOW, preparation is the only control he has. The actual ignition and the subsequent fanning of flames? He clearly has zero control over. Hence, the idea Newsom is to blame for this is absolutely idiotic.

How do we go about fixing it?
#135 | Posted by BellRinger

Since you seem sincerely interested in providing receipts, dig into the California state politics since around 1996 as it relates to this topic. This is nothing new and clearly panaceas are nonexistent. So what does that tell you? IOW, it should explain why a solution hasn't been found. And if you think that matter is solely partisan, I've got a bridge to sell you.

While these horrible fires are burning, we want to rag on those states?

How often is this area of LA exposed to these conditions?

Very low humidity
High winds

I'm not bitching about local and state govt. just asking ... .
#137 | Posted by eberly

Santa Ana winds like we are currently experiencing are rare.

Now I propose the same concept to you: While these horrible fires are burning, we want to rag on the entire state of California, its representatives, and its people? Because that's what's happening, provided by the resident DR Trump cultists, including Trump himself.

Genuinely interested in your response. Thank you I'm advance.

#141 | Posted by LauraMohr

I agree. Especially as it relates to earthquakes or the eventual eruption of Yellowstone.

California has unique natural issues we have to deal with just as Florida has to deal with hurricanes and the Midwest has to deal with tornadoes. Then there's Texas with their issues surrounding freezing temperatures and a poorly protected electrical grid. Some issues can be protected by the State. Some can't. Mitigation is the best we got for any state and that only goes so far.

and send thoughts and prayers.
#145 | Posted by visitor_

Typical response from a MAGAt regardless of the disaster.

Take'm and shove'em

California uses controlled burns, also known as prescribed fires, to mitigate wildfires. These carefully planned burns help reduce excess vegetation, which can fuel wildfires, and improve forest resilience. The state has significantly increased its use of prescribed fires, doubling their implementation between 2021 and 2023 and treating over 700,000 acres in 2023[1][2]. However, challenges such as climate change, liability concerns, and limited suitable weather conditions restrict their broader application[3][6].

We politicize the crap out of everything.
#148 | Posted by eberly

You got a mouse in yo pocket?

Gaslighter in refernce to #142, when was the last time the Republicans were in control of California?
#147 | Posted by visitor

^^Ignorant of California politics.

Swallow it.

I'm not doing it now.

Neither am I, so who is this we you refer to? Be specific.

Is there a single poster from CA on this site who doesn't use the term "red state --------"?
I forgive you.
#153 | Posted by eberly

For what? You're ASSuming I've used the phrase "red state ---- hole"?

Why all the assumptions? California kid here declaring: "I have never used nor even typed the words 'red state ---- hole.'"

Ball's in your court, EB.

#162

Exactly

All blamed squarely on the state government.
#154 | Posted by eberly

By whome? Be specific.

The DR, pundits everywhere. Trump
#165 | Posted by eberly

And you include yourself in that description yet purposely do not include myself, correct?

Is there a single poster from CA on this site who doesn't use the term "red state --------"?
I forgive you.
#153 | Posted by eberly

To start, that's a baseless assumption. Your statement that you "forgive me" suggests you assume that I've used the phrase "red state --------."

Get it?

#176 | Posted by eberly

You deserve the slap first and foremost, Kansanonian.

You can stop victimizing yourself
#179 | Posted by eberly

^^The irony is rife, Kansanonian! Back to my previous points, any care or interest? Your ignorance and assumptions notwithstanding

Poor thing ... ..
#180 | Posted by eberly

The mirror is stark, is it not?

Can they get it out of committee?
#183 | Posted by eberly

You and Jeffy have some homework to do! I'd suggest going back to at least 1996.

I forgive you.
#190 | Posted by eberly

For what? Be specific and stop playing games. SNOOFY is gone, you don't need to take his place.

Poor thing ... ..
But again ... ..I forgive you.
You're cute.
You're cute though.
-- EBERLY

Why do you bother responding at all? You're borderline bipolar. It's obvious.

Why?
#204 | Posted by LampLighter

See my #205.

Regarding what?
#193 | Posted by eberly

The politics surrounding fire mitigation in the state of California since 1996. Are you seriously that slow? Or seriously that insincere? My guess is the latter. What says you?

This bears repeating as it hasn't been even commented upon:

California uses controlled burns, also known as prescribed fires, to mitigate wildfires. These carefully planned burns help reduce excess vegetation, which can fuel wildfires, and improve forest resilience. The state has significantly increased its use of prescribed fires, doubling their implementation between 2021 and 2023 and treating over 700,000 acres in 2023[1][2]. However, challenges such as climate change, liability concerns, and limited suitable weather conditions restrict their broader application[3][6].

Citations:
[1] www.gov.ca.gov
[2] www.fire.ca.gov
[3] newsroom.ucla.edu
[4] ww2.arb.ca.gov
[5] www.savetheredwoods.org
[6] www.nytimes.com
[7] www.mbard.org
[8] cepr.net
[9] www.kqed.org
[10] readyforwildfire.org
#149 | Posted by rstybeach11

#209 | Posted by BellRinger

w'lcome

I am not from California and apparently you are so I'm asking because I'm curious.
#211 | Posted by BellRinger

Staying ahead of the drought is always an issue, one in which is difficult to address legislatively.

California has made real progress with laws that promote water conservation and wildfire prevention, but gaps remain. Water-saving rules have helped reduce waste, yet some communities, especially those with aging infrastructure, still need more support. Wildfire prevention has improved too, with power companies now required to take proactive steps, but devastating fires continue to emerge. "Raking the forest floors" is wildly smplistic, but measures such as clearing dry vegetation around homes and infrastructure, expanding fire safety training, and modernizing electricity stations is still needed even after the devastation of the mid-200s.

Building more reservoirs can help by providing water for firefighting, but they're not a cure-all. A truly effective wildfire strategy requires proactive vegetation management, controlled burns, modernized power grids, expanded fire education, and climate action.

"Then why is rsty saying otherwise?
#220 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2025-01-08 11:44 PM | REPLY | FLAG:"
Hopefully he will provide an answer.
#221 | Posted by BellRinger

You a recovering Catholic? If not, I challenge you to develop some empathy.

Many forces in nature are beyond human control, and it's often reduced to political blame as if voting a certain way could prevent wildfires, droughts, or hurricanes. It's troubling to suggest that people deserve hardship because of their political choices, especially when those challenges stem from complex environmental factors that no individual, or even the most powerful nation, can fully influence let alone control. Policies CAN help manage risk, but nature remains unpredictable, and no amount of legislation can eliminate all danger or risk. Fires are relatively and traditionally normal, as they are in most healthy ecosystems. Now also consider what it will be like when California and the entire West Coast experience the "big one" (i.e., earthquake) or when Yellowstone blows.

I hope partisanship will be ignored when either of those events inevitably happens.

That's what's truly disturbing to me, reading this stuff on the DR; a certain segment of this most august site refuses to even consider empathy.

I'm almost certain that empathy won't put out a wildfire. But I'll send thoughts and prayers anyway.
#240 | Posted by visitor_

Wouldn't expect anything else from you anyway, MAGAt.

Swallow it.