Have any politicians used the CA wildfires to bash the other party?

Question

I see some here are blaming people on the other side for the fires, but have any politicians blamed the other side for the fires in CA. Should we not try and help those in need, rather than use this as a photo op, or a chance to bash the other side? Does CA seem to have more of these fires than other states? Any guess why? I know it is a big state, I just do not remember seein too many of these in Montana, or Idaho.

Thank You As Always.

Answer 1

California will always get these big fires, much like we do over here in Australia - its a result of the vegetation, climate and topography.

Also like in Australia, I don't think may politicians will indulge in the blame game until after the crisis is over, then both sides are bound to try to blame the other in some way.

Global warming will make it worse over time in some places and will lessen the danger in others - it will depend on how the climate changes in local areas. Also, I believe some fool decided to plant some of our eucalypt trees in California years ago - those things go up like sky rockets - its the oil in the leaves.

From what we see however, the Californian administration is somewhat better at coping (through experience most likely) than the Louisiana administration.

Good luck to all - we know what its like and can only pray from over here.

Answer 2

Remember the wildfires in Colorado a few years ago that happened because environmentalists had managed to prevent electric power companies from clearing trees from the right-of-way for their cross country lines. Eventually the increased vegetation growth caused some power line short circuits and the resulting wildfires burned a lot of homes. That lesson should raise the question as to whether or not clearing thick undergrowth in residential areas would, or would not, have prevented or lessened the seriousness of the fires we are now seeing in California. If the answer is to clear a lot of the undergrowth we had better be prepared for a lot of screeching from the environmentalists and Democrats.

Answer 3

Yes, Barbara Boxer of California blames Bush because the troops are in Iraq instead of home fighting the fires.

Answer 4

It happened all day yesterday on the floor of the House. They were blaming Bush for not having enough National Gaurd troops or equipment to fight the fires with because a lot of it was in Iraq. I thought the primary purpose of the military was to fight wars, not forest fires.

Answer 5

I haven't seen politicians do it...but people on YA are and it's disgusting.
It's hard to believe in this modern age, but Southern California is a desert. They get strong winds especially during a weather change (from summer to fall etc.).
Over half a million fellow Americans need help. I'm willing to do what I can.

Answer 6

The Dems have used it to bash Bush for not acting quick enough on Katrina (black vicitims) and acting too quickly in California (white victims) - for racial reasons.


they are scum

Answer 7

Barbara Boxer already blamed Bush, where have you been? But we expected it way earlier, though.

Answer 8

I don't think anyone is going to use this politically....

Unlike Katrina, Bush was quick to respond with promises of fed aid on this one...so I don't see any opportunity for criticism on the part of the president or the fed.....yet.

CA wildfires are nothing new obviously. Seems the whole state burns down at least once per year.

Answer 9

Barbara Boxer has already put her plug nickel in before the fires are even done burning.

Answer 10

Part of the firefighters are supplied by the "NATIONAL" Guard,but I hear they are employed "internationally" at the present time....DUH" Go Figure !( I believe Arnie is bringing a few from "border patrol" to help fight the fires though, )