RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Trump tells FEMA not to send more money to California for forest fires - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Trump tells FEMA not to send more money to California for forest fires Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Moderator T 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 36,982
  • Joined: 02-October 03

  Posted 10 January 2019 - 12:15 AM

Trump tells FEMA not to send more money to California for forest fires

BRETT SAMUELS AND TIMOTHY CAMA
The Hill
1/10/19

EXCERPT:

President Trump said Wednesday that he has ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to withhold funding for California unless the state improves its forest management to prevent wildfires.

"Billions of dollars are sent to the State of California for Forrest (sic) fires that, with proper Forrest (sic) Management, would never happen," Trump tweeted.

"Unless they get their act together, which is unlikely, I have ordered FEMA to send no more money," he added, calling it a "disgraceful situation in lives & money."

Trump later retweeted the statement with "forest" correctly spelled.

FEMA did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of which FEMA is a part.

FEMA and DHS are currently without funding amid a partial government shutdown that has lasted 19 days and counting.

Trump has at least twice before threatened to withhold disaster funding from California for its wildfires and pressed the state to fix what he sees as major flaws with its forest management practices that cause or exacerbate fires.

Local officials and fire experts, meanwhile, have criticized Trump for ignoring the impact that climate change is having on the length and severity of fires — and denying climate change science — while giving too much credit to forest management.


(Full Story)
0

#2 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,483
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 12:35 AM

Quote

Local officials and fire experts, meanwhile, have criticized Trump for ignoring the impact that climate change is having on the length and severity of fires — and denying climate change science

OFFS... :rolleyes:
0

#3 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,306
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 01:31 AM

Good. Brown and Newsome think they can run this state as they see fit without following Federal law and ripping apart the state constitution day by day, so let them live with the consequences.

And I am sure they will come up with more ways to tax us to pay for it all, like their eyeing the TEXT TAX and wanting to make it RETROACTIVE FOR 5 YEARS.
0

#4 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 30,009
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 05:26 AM

Good.

Force them to manage maintain and prevent their fire hazards. They won't ever unless forced to.
0

#5 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 4,836
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 10 January 2019 - 05:54 AM

:clap:
0

#6 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • It's OK To Be White
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 26,966
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 10 January 2019 - 07:36 AM

Well done sir!

Wow, prudent management of the public coffers, what a concept?!
0

#7 User is offline   That_Guy 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 20,059
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM


0

#8 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,156
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 10 January 2019 - 08:31 AM

Hey That_Guy. All these great things that Trump is leading, your side could have chosen to do when you held all three branches of government, and briefly with a supermajority. Obama could have then made America great again, and there would have been no need for Trump. Obama could have gone with known successful methods of capitalism rather than looking for solutions in high tax, government rule, socialist policies.

Coulda. Shoulda. But just wouldn’t have. There’s a cool true story. Sort of like from “Guns, Germs and Steel”. Why did the Spaniards conqueri the Incas? Why didn’t the Incas conquer Spain?
0

#9 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 11,944
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 08:49 AM

This may have already been answered somewhere before, but I am going to ask because I am curious. If it has, sorry.

Isn't a lot of the land that he is talking about Federal land, i.e. National Forests? If yes, is the Federal government giving California money to manage the forests and they just aren't doing it? Where is that money going now? If it is national land then the dialog needs to be demanding an accounting of what is given that would avoid the need for emergency funds rather doing this...or at least in addition to doing this.

If it is primarily State land, then "duhhh." If you don't want to clear out the underbrush, dead wood, etc., so that new growth can thrive...all in the name of some gaia worshipping PC enviro-naturalism...then mother nature will do it for you. Her way is pretty harsh. Reap what you sow.
0

#10 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 24,973
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 10 January 2019 - 08:57 AM

It's called accountability and results, something that has been lacking for many years.
Something these cretins don't like because it means things can't just be about politics and B.S. (the only things they know).

Oki
0

#11 User is offline   Italian Biker 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 4,088
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 09:21 AM

personally, I believed that all federal funding and resources should have been pulled from CA a long time ago over their willingness to harbor fugitives and pass state laws to do so. Though I agree that CA has had terrible forest management practices, cutting FEMA funding to CA is a big mistake from a political and public relations standpoint. Especially when still dealing with the aftermath of the fires they had this year. Cut all other funding, yes. But have FEMA finish what they're doing, then leave.
0

#12 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 4,836
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:07 AM

View PostThat_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:




:rolleyes:
0

#13 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,483
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 03:51 PM

View PostThat_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

*snip fail*

:rolleyes: You really must be a dependent class city dweller. Again... for the mentally impaired:


http://www.rightnation.us/forums/uploads/1540273186/gallery_6133_220_82753.jpg


There are many different types of rakes involved with forestry and land management. There are manual rakes for forestry and heavy equipment rakes like the one pictured above or a Root Rake for example. Not all rakes are used to corral leaves on your manicured lawn. Let me know if you need me to define what a lawn is next.
0

#14 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 24,973
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 10 January 2019 - 04:57 PM

View PostThat_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:




Would you continue giving money to someone who isn't doing the job you are paying them to?
IE if your mechanic at best fixed your car half way would you go back to them? Would you pay a roofer full price for an incomplete or crappy job?
Who would you pay full price if they didn't meet the terms of the agreement?

Oki
0

#15 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,794
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 05:52 PM

View PostJerryL, on 10 January 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:

This may have already been answered somewhere before, but I am going to ask because I am curious. If it has, sorry.

Isn't a lot of the land that he is talking about Federal land, i.e. National Forests? If yes, is the Federal government giving California money to manage the forests and they just aren't doing it? Where is that money going now? If it is national land then the dialog needs to be demanding an accounting of what is given that would avoid the need for emergency funds rather doing this...or at least in addition to doing this.

If it is primarily State land, then "duhhh." If you don't want to clear out the underbrush, dead wood, etc., so that new growth can thrive...all in the name of some gaia worshipping PC enviro-naturalism...then mother nature will do it for you. Her way is pretty harsh. Reap what you sow.


California:

45,864,800 acres of federal land

100,206,720 total acres of California

45.8% of California is federally owned.
0

#16 User is offline   stick 

  • The 'Little Genius' giving thanks
  • View blog
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 16,422
  • Joined: 24-November 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 06:21 PM

View PostThat_Guy, on 10 January 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:




If you have a point, why don't you go ahead and make it?
0

#17 User is offline   Ben Cranklin 

  • Satiric Curmudgeon
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 6,751
  • Joined: 27-June 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 09:40 PM

View PostSARGE, on 10 January 2019 - 05:52 PM, said:

California:

45,864,800 acres of federal land

100,206,720 total acres of California

45.8% of California is federally owned.


Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.
0

#18 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,794
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:07 PM

View PostBen Cranklin, on 10 January 2019 - 09:40 PM, said:

Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.



Alaska -- 61.2%

Arizona -- 38.6%

Idaho -- 61.6%

Nevada -- 84.9%

Oregon -- 52.9%

Utah -- 64.9%

https://ballotpedia....ership_by_state
0

#19 User is offline   Ben Cranklin 

  • Satiric Curmudgeon
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 6,751
  • Joined: 27-June 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:10 PM

View PostBen Cranklin, on 10 January 2019 - 09:40 PM, said:

Interesting. Sounds like a lot, but I wonder how other states compare.

Do, if this is accurate, the federal government owns 28% of the U.S., mostly in the western states. They only own .69% of NY, but 61% of Alaska.

https://ballotpedia....icy_in_New_York

View PostSARGE, on 10 January 2019 - 10:07 PM, said:

Alaska -- 61.2%

Arizona -- 38.6%

Idaho -- 61.6%

Nevada -- 84.9%

Oregon -- 52.9%

Utah -- 64.9%

https://ballotpedia....ership_by_state

Thanks, our posts must have crossed.
0

#20 User is offline   Ben Cranklin 

  • Satiric Curmudgeon
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 6,751
  • Joined: 27-June 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:11 PM

Wow, Nevada!
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users