WWTBAM Bored

Donald Trump March 2019 wrote:FEMA has been told directly by me to give the A Plus treatment to the Great State of Alabama and the wonderful people who have been so devastated by the Tornadoes. @GovernorKayIvey, one of the best in our Country, has been so informed. She is working closely with FEMA (and me!).

Donald Trump January 2019 wrote:Billions of dollars are sent to the State of California for Forest fires that, with proper Forest Management, would never happen. Unless they get their act together, which is unlikely, I have ordered FEMA to send no more money. It is a disgraceful situation in lives & money!

You really can't see the difference? Are you really that dense?

I'm not saying Trump's response to California was a good one. I thought it a poor decision. But what he is saying is that mismanagement of the forests increased the risk and extent of damage from fires. There is some truth to that. There is no such mismanagement (at least mentioned) that caused the tornadoes or the extent of the damage.

BackInTex wrote:But what he is saying is that mismanagement of the forests increased the risk and extent of damage from fires. There is some truth to that.

Are you referring to those forests that were under National Forest Service management? Got it.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote:But what he is saying is that mismanagement of the forests increased the risk and extent of damage from fires. There is some truth to that.

Are you referring to those forests that were under National Forest Service management? Got it.

It doesn't matter who's management they were under. Like I said, I didn't agree with Trump's position on California. But your idiotic question about "what's different" was answered. Trumps may have been wrong, but there is clearly a difference in the two situations.

BackInTex wrote: but there is clearly a difference in the two situations.

Yes, it's called Red State/Blue State (and my question was rhetorical).

BackInTex wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote:But what he is saying is that mismanagement of the forests increased the risk and extent of damage from fires. There is some truth to that.

Are you referring to those forests that were under National Forest Service management? Got it.

It doesn't matter who's management they were under. Like I said, I didn't agree with Trump's position on California. But your idiotic question about "what's different" was answered. Trumps may have been wrong, but there is clearly a difference in the two situations.

The only difference in the two situations that's at all relevant to Donny is that Alabama voted for him and California never will.

People give me a hard time for referring to him as "Donny" instead of by his title. We ordinarily accord respect to the President, even when we disagree with him, because we trust that the occupant of that office is genuinely trying in good faith to put the country's interests ahead of his own personal or political interests, even if that requires some sacrifice or if it means helping a political opponent. I believed that of President George W. Bush even though I thought he was a terrible President. I believed it of Ronald Reagan even though I devoutly disagreed with the direction in which he steered the country. (I[m leaving out Bush 41 only because I thought in some ways he wasn't bad at the job. His willingness to put the country's interests above his personal interests was obvious.) And I think that most Republicans believe that of the three most recent Democratic Presidents.

Donny doesn't give a damn about anything but his own personal interests. His conduct in office has demonstrated that truth time and time again. He's a disgrace to the office wholly undeserving of even a shred of respect. --Bob

Hey BobJ!!! Alert. Hey sss!
Whataboutism. Prezzes can do whatevah the fuck they want.

https://www.politifact.com/texas/statem ... s-obama-a/

Beebs52 wrote:Hey BobJ!!! Alert. Hey sss!
Whataboutism. Prezzes can do whatevah the fuck they want.

https://www.politifact.com/texas/statem ... s-obama-a/

Directly from the article: "FEMA has not denied federal aid for the Texas wildfires; it’s approved fire-fighting grants adding up to $23 million — far more than Oklahoma’s approximate $3 million in disaster aid." --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:Hey BobJ!!! Alert. Hey sss!
Whataboutism. Prezzes can do whatevah the fuck they want.

https://www.politifact.com/texas/statem ... s-obama-a/

Directly from the article: "FEMA has not denied federal aid for the Texas wildfires; it’s approved fire-fighting grants adding up to $23 million — far more than Oklahoma’s approximate $3 million in disaster aid." --Bob

Staples correctly says that the Obama administration denied Texas’ request for a disaster declaration due to long-burning wildfires: The same administration approved a similar disaster declaration request from Oklahoma in 2009, in response to wildfires that burned for only a few days.

But the statement leaves out a crucial relevant fact. FEMA has not denied federal aid for the Texas wildfires; it’s approved fire-fighting grants adding up to $23 million — far more than Oklahoma’s approximate $3 million in disaster aid.

We rate Staples statement Mostly True.

Just saying. Think Ca has federal aid

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
Are you referring to those forests that were under National Forest Service management? Got it.

It doesn't matter who's management they were under. Like I said, I didn't agree with Trump's position on California. But your idiotic question about "what's different" was answered. Trumps may have been wrong, but there is clearly a difference in the two situations.

The only difference in the two situations that's at all relevant to Donny is that Alabama voted for him and California never will.

People give me a hard time for referring to him as "Donny" instead of by his title. We ordinarily accord respect to the President, even when we disagree with him, because we trust that the occupant of that office is genuinely trying in good faith to put the country's interests ahead of his own personal or political interests, even if that requires some sacrifice or if it means helping a political opponent. I believed that of President George W. Bush even though I thought he was a terrible President. I believed it of Ronald Reagan even though I devoutly disagreed with the direction in which he steered the country. (I[m leaving out Bush 41 only because I thought in some ways he wasn't bad at the job. His willingness to put the country's interests above his personal interests was obvious.) And I think that most Republicans believe that of the three most recent Democratic Presidents.

Donny doesn't give a damn about anything but his own personal interests. His conduct in office has demonstrated that truth time and time again. He's a disgrace to the office wholly undeserving of even a shred of respect. --Bob

You don't give a damn about anything but tearing down trump no matter what he does or doesn't do, and you proclaimed your intentions even before he was inaugurated. If anyone's putting their personal and political interests ahead of the good of the country, it's you and your morally bankrupt political party. Peddle your hatred somewhere else. You're not convincing anyone.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:
It doesn't matter who's management they were under. Like I said, I didn't agree with Trump's position on California. But your idiotic question about "what's different" was answered. Trumps may have been wrong, but there is clearly a difference in the two situations.

The only difference in the two situations that's at all relevant to Donny is that Alabama voted for him and California never will.

People give me a hard time for referring to him as "Donny" instead of by his title. We ordinarily accord respect to the President, even when we disagree with him, because we trust that the occupant of that office is genuinely trying in good faith to put the country's interests ahead of his own personal or political interests, even if that requires some sacrifice or if it means helping a political opponent. I believed that of President George W. Bush even though I thought he was a terrible President. I believed it of Ronald Reagan even though I devoutly disagreed with the direction in which he steered the country. (I[m leaving out Bush 41 only because I thought in some ways he wasn't bad at the job. His willingness to put the country's interests above his personal interests was obvious.) And I think that most Republicans believe that of the three most recent Democratic Presidents.

Donny doesn't give a damn about anything but his own personal interests. His conduct in office has demonstrated that truth time and time again. He's a disgrace to the office wholly undeserving of even a shred of respect. --Bob

You don't give a damn about anything but tearing down trump no matter what he does or doesn't do, and you proclaimed your intentions even before he was inaugurated. If anyone's putting their personal and political interests ahead of the good of the country, it's you and your morally bankrupt political party. Peddle your hatred somewhere else. You're not convincing anyone.

I don't need to convince anyone. Donny's taking care of that for me. As demonstrated in November 2018. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote: You're not convincing anyone.

We've already convinced over half the country. Probably more, because I have a strong suspicion that many Republicans know exactly who Trump is but judge that the benefits of retaining power are enough to outweigh any condemnation they may have for him.

BackInTex wrote:You really can't see the difference? Are you really that dense?

I'm not saying Trump's response to California was a good one. I thought it a poor decision. But what he is saying is that mismanagement of the forests increased the risk and extent of damage from fires. There is some truth to that. There is no such mismanagement (at least mentioned) that caused the tornadoes or the extent of the damage.

nope, they should've built round buildings to minimize the damage :p

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APpRKZiAkKI

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Peddle your hatred somewhere else. You're not convincing anyone.

If "convincing" people is the standard we're going by, nobody here ever succeeds.

franktangredi wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Peddle your hatred somewhere else. You're not convincing anyone.

If "convincing" people is the standard we're going by, nobody here ever succeeds.

I'm not convinced that's the case...

lb13

littlebeast13 wrote:

franktangredi wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Peddle your hatred somewhere else. You're not convincing anyone.

If "convincing" people is the standard we're going by, nobody here ever succeeds.

I'm not convinced that's the case...

lb13

I don't agree with either of you

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

littlebeast13 wrote:

franktangredi wrote:
If "convincing" people is the standard we're going by, nobody here ever succeeds.

I'm not convinced that's the case...

lb13

I don't agree with either of you

Who are you, the anti-Tevye?

franktangredi wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

littlebeast13 wrote:

I'm not convinced that's the case...

lb13

I don't agree with either of you

Who are you, the anti-Tevye?

No, apparently, I'm a trump fan-boy.
TRADITION, TRADITION!!