Bush Hoses Cali Again!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by waggie945, Oct 31, 2003.

  1. In April, Gov. Gray Davis requested $430 million to remove unhealthy beetle-infested trees on 415,000 acres of forest, trees that experts warned could fuel a catastrophic Southern California fire.

    The request went "unanswered" until last week - - - and then was denied.

    The Davis administration had sent a letter to Bush on April 16th of this year warning that the bark beetle infestation was threatening severe fires in three counties:

    San Diego
    San Bernardino

    Davis warned that 75,000 residents of mountain communities were threatened. He requested $300 million from the US Forest Service and $130 million from a FEMA account of unused money that was set aside from previous disasters.

    The letter was also signed by Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, and REPUBLICAN REPS:

    Mary Bono of Palm Springs
    Jerry Lewis of Redlands ( San Bernardino County )
    Darrell Issa of Vista ( San Diego County )
    David Dreier of San Dimas ( Los Angeles County )
    Duncan Hunter of Alpine ( San Diego County )

    Boxer said, "We named 3 of the 4 counties that are up in smoke, and we begged him ( Bush ) to delcare a disaster, we begged him. We saw this coming a mile away"

    As of August, there was an estimated 350,000 bug-killed acres in the San Bernardino National Forest. Yet, the US Forestry Service had initially proposed just $2 million this past year to treat bug-killed trees in the San Bernardino National Forest.

  2. You know, the problem was that the beetle infested trees didn't threaten oil fields.
  3. $430 million? notice this article doesn't say who's gonna pay for that?

    don't these people realize that the iraqi's urgently need garbage trucks and post offices?!? turkey has to be bribed, and wolfowitz has a ton of really important photo ops to fly to.

    these people have no sense of priority. they should go back to eating cheese and let the big boys make the decisions.
  4. maxpi


    The Bush admin knew that by the time they got through battling environmentalists and their attorneys over every square foot of the forest it would be too late probably. Environmentalists are the single cause of the current conflagration going on in California. To turn around and try to blame the Bush admin for this is just beyond unsettling, it is sick. Environmentalists got away with blaming Enron for California's shortage of energy, the voters blamed Davis, now you are going to blame Bush for the forest fires?? Somewhere else you will probably be posting how Bush admin is bad for the environment.

    Lookit, I heard a CA senator, member of Arnold's transition team commenting on the forest mis-management and how the policies have to be changed and the Bush admin just passed a bill which will allow us to go back to MANAGING the forests instead of burning them. All they really have to do is cut off the public funding that pays environmental attorneys to stop the very agencies charged with clearing the underbrush and getting the dead trees out.

    Environmentalists put metal spikes in trees and did so much damage to the logging industry that the loggers essentially just logged out the whole pacific northwest!! Why not, the environuts were going to kill their industry and burn the forests anyhow.

    Unless the Dems can get control of the White House and both houses of Congress this environmental krap is going to have to go away. Nobody would go along with it if they knew the actual goal is to get people out of the forests and return all cities and farms back to nature!!

    Check out this insane garbage quoted from our "leading environmentalists" who will stop your construction project to protect a frog and will burn your whole nationl forest.


  5. I guess it was more important for Boxer and Feinstein to block judicial nominees and tax cuts than get this money. I'm reasonably sure they could have made some trades and got it, but they would rather have something to squawk about. That seems to be a pattern with Dem's and California. It's always someone else's fault when their policies lead to predictable disasters. And someone else should pay for it.

    No doubt there's plenty of blame to hand out for this disaster, starting with the forest service and including the environmentalists.
  6. You've got to be kidding, right?

    The term, "MANAGING" the forests for the Bush Administration means:


    Let's get real.
  7. When will you stupid, stupid people ever learn? The Liberals/Democrats, who as we all know are communists who cavort with terrorists, are responsible for everything and anything that is wrong.

    Our beloved leader, George W. Bush, who will surely be returned to office, even if he fails to get the most votes again, and the Republican Party are responsible for nothing, with the possible exception of telling others to take personal responsibility.

    It is pointless to try to blame Mr. Bush or any other Republican (conservative of course) for anything. They can do no wrong. And remember, we are fortunate to have several members who monitor this forum, and stand ready to defend any conservative, or conservative cause at the drop of a hat - even if others sometimes find the defense laughable, absurd, or pointless.
  8. And of course, $87 BILLION DOLLARS for new Post Offices in IRAQ takes priority over a mere $430 million for the World's 5th Largest Economy!

    TM Direct must be out of town.
    I can't believe he didn't fall for my "bait" this time!

    Disclaimer: I voted for Tom Mc Clintock ( Republican ) for Gov.

  9. The problem with the liberals and democrats is that they don't understand and accept the principle of "The Divine Right of Kings."
  10. Since when is the US President responsible for running the state of California? If the California governor really thought it was such an imminent threat in his state, why didn't he call a special session of the state congress and strongarm them into passing a spending bill to deal with the problem? Seems to me that passing the buck is the norm in politics.
    #10     Oct 31, 2003