Real World Event Discussions

wildfires and politics

POSTED BY: mal4prez
UPDATED: Sunday, August 9, 2026 14:08
VIEWED: 27581
PAGE 4 of 15

WISHIMAY

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
If there was a way to fight that off, requiring some specialized training and gear that a government system can provide far more ably than any individual... you're saying that shouldn't be done because everyone should just "be prepared" to fight off their own goddamn tornado? Because if you're saying that, you are wrong on a level that makes my head spin.

I'm saying that PEOPLE should do more to fix things themselves, and quit sitting on their hands going "Gov't, oh gov't, save me save me..." I don't believe a gov't IS more able, to do ANYTHING. A local problem is better fixed by people who are local than some idiot about to tee off a thousand miles away. Ever heard of civilian organizations?

NIKI2

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:53 PM

Can you even conceive of how many civilian organizations it would require, and at what cost, for each state to "take care of" its own? Where would Colorado be today if they only had their own "civilian organization" of firefighteres out there fighting the current fires?

It's sad how some peple seem to be incapable of conceiving of a middle ground. How they can't imagine citizens pitching in to help when their own resources requires help from the government. It has to be all or nothing for people like you, and that's sad because the result, if you got your way, would be devastating. I'm sorry for you.

Absolutes when it comes to political stances are no answer to anything, just partisan blathering.

MAL4PREZ

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
If there was a way to fight that off, requiring some specialized training and gear that a government system can provide far more ably than any individual... you're saying that shouldn't be done because everyone should just "be prepared" to fight off their own goddamn tornado? Because if you're saying that, you are wrong on a level that makes my head spin.

I'm saying that PEOPLE should do more to fix things themselves, and quit sitting on their hands going "Gov't, oh gov't, save me save me..." I don't believe a gov't IS more able, to do ANYTHING. A local problem is better fixed by people who are local than some idiot about to tee off a thousand miles away. Ever heard of civilian organizations?

You're making a big assumption here. Do you really think that this basic help-yourself stuff is something novel that you thought up and no one else has ever tried? No. Duh. The difference between you and me is that I assume people are sensible enough to have taken those steps, and you seem to think you're the only one who's come up with such novel ideas. You, and most conservatives these days, seem to think that supporting govt programs means taking no individual actions. Why do you make it all or nothing?

I heard that, as of this morning, maybe 200 homes in western CO springs have burned. Do you think those people didn't have insurance? Do you think they made no efforts to clear brush, wet their trees, get out their fire extinguishers, make plans with neighbors to help each other? Do you really believe none of this actions were taken, or that these actions could have stopped this fire?

Do you any concept of how DEAD a bunch of civilians would be if they had tried to stop that inferno coming down the mountain? Or how FAILED a small-town local fire dept would be if they tried to handle it with no outside help?

Really, I find it frustrating how people like you assume that others are sitting on their sofas, not buying insurance, not taking basic steps to prepare themselves against disasters, and whining "Gov't, oh gov't, save me save me..." Maybe you make the assumption that other people are like that because your own mindset is, or was, once something like that? I have no idea what you're like, but you do seem to think it's a big step to take care of one's own shit. Um... not so much. That's pretty much a basic for most of us.

BTW, your above post is pretty much a callous, offensive and dickish thing to say right now. How about you fly out to Colorado, sit down with the 32000 evacuees and tell them to stop whining: "Gov't, oh gov't, save me save me...". And when you're done, head to the hills and show us just how your patented "self-reliance plan" can save an entire city.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:25 PM

Quote:
Ever heard of civilian organizations?

Hello,

There may be many problems a local group of civilians can solve. Let's call this group a 'neighborhood.'

When a problem is beyond them, they may form a larger unit of civilians with more resources who all chip into solving the problem. Let's call this group a 'city.'

When a problem outstrips the capacity of those people to handle, they may form into a larger unit of people from a larger swath of the area. Let's call this group a 'county.'

Sometimes even more people and resources are needed to solve a problem, and sometimes a problem is a wide ranging problem requiring input from people outside the county. When this happens, the civilians form into a vast collective force known as a 'state.'

Occasionally, even a state is confronted with problems that are bigger than its capacity to handle. When this happens, the civilians from across the land pool resources and form what we call a 'nation.'

I often have problems with the way these civilian collectives solve their problems and make decisions. However, I am not prepared to dismiss the need for them.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Never forget what these men are.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

HERO

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Can you even conceive of how many civilian organizations it would require, and at what cost, for each state to "take care of" its own? Where would Colorado be today if they only had their own "civilian organization" of firefighteres out there fighting the current fires?

I guessing they'd have an out of control fire...so they'd be in exactly the same position today.

Tomorrow is where interstate and interagency cooperation counts most.

Quote:

Absolutes when it comes to political stances are no answer to anything, just partisan blathering.

Katrina, Bush let the black folks drown.

Colorado, Obama let the white folks burn.

Both statements are equally stupid since the weather is actually controlled by Sean Connery.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

YINYANG

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
In terms of politics... I have to say that if I were a campaign strategist for the president, I would tell him to just run footage of all these wildfires interspliced with Romney saying we don't need more firefighters. Considering the amount of devastation and the definite and undeniable need for firefighters here, I think it would make Romney pretty unpopular in Colorado. Maybe I'm wrong, but there are now thousands of firefighters in this state risking their lives, and I'm just... I'm totally on their side.

Obama's doing one better: he's coming to tour the Waldo Canyon fire on Friday.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20951895/president-obama-tou
r-waldo-canyon-fire-friday

PHOENIXROSE

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:14 PM

I adore you, Anthony.

Quote:
Originally posted by YINYANG:
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20951895/president-obama-tou
r-waldo-canyon-fire-friday]

Good for him!
(I'm still in favor of repetition, repetition, repetition.)

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
I guessing they'd have an out of control fire...so they'd be in exactly the same position today.

No. Less control could easily mean half the city of Colorado Springs gone. If it was only the fire dept. of the Springs trying to beat it back, they couldn't have done it, because it required hundreds of people to hold a containment line at the city limits. The wind broke that line, but they're re-establishing it.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

KWICKO

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Katrina, Bush let the black folks drown.

Colorado, Romney said let the white folks burn, since we don't need any more firefighters.

Fixed that for ya!

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

KWICKO

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Would you say the same thing about healthcare, or abortion? "Life's unexpected; deal with it yourself."

Seems a pretty cold way to live.

NO, that's why I pay insurance and why I've been dilgent that I would only have one child. I thought it was one of the unwritten rules of life that Gov't miight be there if you need it but if you really really wanna be sure, best to have your own butt covered.

I tried relying on the gov't once and I got the cold shoulder. Makes one grow up and understand the reality of existence really damn quick. No one is gonna care more about you than you yourself can.

Okay, I've got fire insurance, health insurance, life insurance. I can reasonably protect my house and family. What I *DON'T* have, though, is fire insurance on an entire forest, an entire city, or even my entire block, or the ability to fight the fire while it's ten miles away instead of when it's on my doorstep.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:

I'm trying not to let my shock and worry lead me to saying mean things, but I need to ask our conservative friends if they really want to get rid of the federal govt and leave every community in the country to battle disasters like this on their own. You can't have it both ways. You can't cut everything back, then demand instant and unlimited help when you need it. You can't say you want the feds the hell out of your life, then blame them when they don't swoop down and save you in a near impossible situation.

So many other issues related to this. Climate change, for instance... ?

Anyway, please discuss. I'll be up all night anyway, checking to see which way this thing goes.

Govt has a proper function. Aiding in natural disasters and helping control illegal immigration, yes, but telling us how much soda we can buy or forcing us to put in pool side ladles for the handicap, not so much. The problem is the bureaucrats who want govt to be everything for everyone ( Obama's "Julia" , is a prime example ), and that is NOT what the founders had intended.

It's not suppose to be an 'all or nothing' proposition. Anyone who says that is lying, or is trying to deceive. What gets folks so annoyed is how some want to thrust govt upon us , at every damn turn of our lives, and then scream that if we didn't have govt, we'd all be living in anarchy! No one would fight fires, pick up trash, or catch criminals! What a load of hooey. Those things are what govt SHOULD be doing, and yet there's long list of pork that steals $ away from essential services, to placate certain voter blocks, which keep " the right people " in Washington, or where ever.

A comparison can be made to the mafia, who come around and hit up shop owners for 'protection money'. " Nice place ya got here. Sure would be a shame if it accidentally caught fire one night...or if your pretty wife or daughter crossed paths w/ the wrong sort of people, while their on the way home from work, or ballet class. "

Cases like this fire are prime examples. Why if Republicans had their way, there'd be NO ONE to fight this fire !! See what I mean? It's either all or nothing with some folks. Yes, we need fire , police and EMT's, but we DON'T need John Murtha Regional Airports, which serve next to no one. or even a Reagan Int'l Conference center. And there are 1000's of examples i could give, but no one cares about THOSE silly little things, not when there's an actual big ass fire burning in Colorado! That's NEWS! That's NOW!

And that's the point. The big govt types will use these extreme situations to rustle up sympathy for more and more govt, so that ' never again!' will there be any thing like this happen to the good people of our great nation!

please!

And don't get me started on the 100% sham that is ' climate change'.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall