Are they really that clueless ? Or is it just a knee-jerk blame-the-victim reflex of small govt nutcases?
http://www.drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html
2007-10-24 00:32:26 · 14 answers · asked by oohhbother 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes somehow, experts in saving the environment were, according to Republicans in Yahoo Answers, never taught that dry timber can catch fire.
The Reactionary Right is doing exactly that: ANYTHING they can come up with (whether true or not) to try to make the left look bad (although can you explain to me how environmentalists are supposed to go on private property to to clear deadwood?) is acceptable to the "Lyin' Right".
The Japanese have a saying: "Fix the Problem, Not the Blame". But in Republicans' cases, fixing the blame on anyone BUT Republicans as soon as they can (again, whether based in reality or not) is the just Neo-Republican SOP.
Your link shows off the basic weakness of Republican leadership: No compassion for Americans. For example:
One million people have been forced to abandon their homes, due to the fires in CA. The US Government's response? Send in 25,000 cots, for 1 million people.
Second example: Not one Republican in YA talking about the fires in CA have said ONE WORD of sympathy for the victims, the displaced people, the lost homes, possessions and memories, all they can say is, "It's Environmentalists' Fault" and "Didn't Arnie Look GOOD Doing His Job?"
It is this discconnect from the cares and concerns of US citizens which have made so many turn awat from the Republican Party the last 7 years.
2007-10-24 01:11:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The opposition to controlled burns in areas where there are a large number of homes comes from home owners and communities who are afraid of the fire escaping, do not want to deal with the smoke and ash, or in some cases do not want their view destroyed. Environmental groups are primarily interest in forest , particular old growth forest, not with suburban landscapes and their official position is they support the clearing of underbrush and flammable material near residential areas. The reaction is knee jerk conservatism.
2007-10-24 02:24:46 · answer #2 · answered by meg 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i live in a Bush fire zone in Australia .... and back in 1983 we had some fires that are refered to as THE ASH WEDNESDAY FIRES .. in three states .. i think the total of people killed was 75.
some people contribute the fierceness of the fire to the amount of ground fuel ... In the area I live .. there had been an influx of city people to the hills .. and they carried with them their noble but not practical Idea of allowing ground coverage to rot and return to the earth ... In years previous and years hence controlled burns had been carried out to reduce the amount of ground fuel ( limbs of trees . dry grass .. leaves etc)....
I don't know the situation of what took place in California... BUT if it was a case of something that what happened where i live .. I can KIND of understand how SOME people MAY blame SOME greenies...
HERE we NEED to have controlled burn-off's .. we're headed for a scarey scarey fire period..... some people don't understand why it IS so important .
2007-10-24 00:48:39 · answer #3 · answered by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
1. Environmentalists keep preventing fires and allowing the fuel load in the land to get too large.
2, They also don't want water to be regulated and store in dams and such.
So no water and lots of burnable material you have a prefect situation a fire.
2007-10-24 00:47:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Someone show me proof on this 'so called' Liberal conspiracy for preventing brush clearing......And I'm talking about REAL proof, not some opinion piece by a right-wing kook. Anybody?
2007-10-24 01:24:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Enironmentalists have blocked the forrestry service for years from thinning that is needed to reduce(not prevent) the fires. I haven't heard anyone blame them for the drought though.
2007-10-24 00:42:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
They went to court to stop the Forrest Service from doing controlled burns to remove fuel ( deadwood ) from those areas.
Nor do they want roads cut into the area to help fight fires.
Every year thousands of achers burn in S.C. and they don't want anything done about it.
They want it NATURAL.
2007-10-24 00:53:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
They just need someone to blame for a natural dissaster. If anaything, they're the least to blame.
2007-10-24 00:37:50 · answer #8 · answered by musiclov3r17 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
because They just need someone to blame for the pollution of natural &disaster & the future of our planet . .
2007-10-24 01:00:44 · answer #9 · answered by sulieman 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
They're clueless AND nutcases.
2007-10-24 00:36:55 · answer #10 · answered by ck4829 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋