|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends.
|
United States24513 Posts
On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause
Can you clarify what distinction you are making here? You may be using a different meaning of "proximate cause" than I am.
|
I mean come the fuck on with this nonsense. Where was this when the carolinas got battered by a hurricane? This is the scummiest of the scummy on these fires. No one has any suggestions or experience for what should happen, trump and his team just want to make it a culture war issue.
How can we move forward and solve problems when one side insists on acting like online trolls? We need to acknowledge problems and work towards solutions. Playing politics with EVERYTHING is killing the country.
|
On January 13 2025 10:20 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause Can you clarify what distinction you are making here? You may be using a different meaning of "proximate cause" than I am.
Im not using it in the legal sense, but as something that could be a meaningful contribution to the problem. Like I said I think we unlikely to find a smoking-gun on this topic and it's impact but it it could be part of it, as well as a sign of misplaced priorities
And someone at the FD saying that if they can't help you it's probably your fault is bad and no number of paragraphs trying to interpret it is going to make it OK. Just thought I'd add that.
|
On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends.
Nope, still fucking gross. You’re not even really trying to point out ways the leaders are or have been negligent, you’re just generally gesturing at a bad outcome and saying “well, you know, if we assume that DEI initiatives tend to make an organization less effective, then it’s not impossible that the fires would be less bad if the FD didn’t have DEI initiatives.”
They do controlled burns and such sometimes, but in Southern California specifically the whole biome is designed to burn and regrow in the burned soil. Wildfires have functionally infinite fuel to start in. The fires were getting worse every year for a while because of both global and local weather stuff (climate change, but also the drought). Winter is supposed to be our rainy season and the last couple years we had higher-than-average rain so things were better; this year I had been getting increasingly nervous that the rains just weren’t coming. Add in 80 mph Santa Ana winds and this was always going to be really bad.
Down here in San Diego we’ve been relatively fortunate, I think our last really bad fire was in 2007 or something, but I know it could happen any time. And if/when it does, you can fucking bet there will be a bunch of right wing ghouls jeering and gloating about how I probably lost my house because there were tampons in the FD men’s bathroom or something, with you and BJ nodding approvingly. You can do what you want, but it fucking sucks and you don’t have to cosign it.
|
On January 13 2025 10:35 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends. Nope, still fucking gross. You’re not even really trying to point out ways the leaders are or have been negligent, you’re just generally gesturing at a bad outcome and saying “well, you know, if we assume that DEI initiatives tend to make an organization less effective, then it’s not impossible that the fires would be less bad if the FD didn’t have DEI initiatives.” They do controlled burns and such sometimes, but in Southern California specifically the whole biome is designed to burn and regrow in the burned soil. Wildfires have functionally infinite fuel to start in. The fires were getting worse every year for a while because of both global and local weather stuff (climate change, but also the drought). Winter is supposed to be our rainy season and the last couple years we had higher-than-average rain so things were better; this year I had been getting increasingly nervous that the rains just weren’t coming. Add in 80 mph Santa Ana winds and this was always going to be really bad. Down here in San Diego we’ve been relatively fortunate, I think our last really bad fire was in 2007 or something, but I know it could happen any time. And if/when it does, you can fucking bet there will be a bunch of right wing ghouls jeering and gloating about how I probably lost my house because there were tampons in the FD men’s bathroom or something, with you and BJ nodding approvingly. You can do what you want, but it fucking sucks and you don’t have to cosign it.
I haven't blamed anything yet, we'll need to take stock when things calm down. But it's not gross, eveyone who lives in Socal, or anywhere in CA really, knows fires are a danger. So you have to try to do prevention, and you absolutely can mitigate damage even when it's a different set of plant matter besides forest trees. And you can have better infrastructure, etc.
And see my reply to micro, it csn show bad priorities. I think you trying to parse thst absurd video is worse than anything I've said and might display what I'm talking about
|
Introvert i hope you had this same feedback for the people who lived near rivers and at the bases of hills/valleys in the carolinas.
Wtf
|
On January 13 2025 10:41 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 10:35 ChristianS wrote:On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends. Nope, still fucking gross. You’re not even really trying to point out ways the leaders are or have been negligent, you’re just generally gesturing at a bad outcome and saying “well, you know, if we assume that DEI initiatives tend to make an organization less effective, then it’s not impossible that the fires would be less bad if the FD didn’t have DEI initiatives.” They do controlled burns and such sometimes, but in Southern California specifically the whole biome is designed to burn and regrow in the burned soil. Wildfires have functionally infinite fuel to start in. The fires were getting worse every year for a while because of both global and local weather stuff (climate change, but also the drought). Winter is supposed to be our rainy season and the last couple years we had higher-than-average rain so things were better; this year I had been getting increasingly nervous that the rains just weren’t coming. Add in 80 mph Santa Ana winds and this was always going to be really bad. Down here in San Diego we’ve been relatively fortunate, I think our last really bad fire was in 2007 or something, but I know it could happen any time. And if/when it does, you can fucking bet there will be a bunch of right wing ghouls jeering and gloating about how I probably lost my house because there were tampons in the FD men’s bathroom or something, with you and BJ nodding approvingly. You can do what you want, but it fucking sucks and you don’t have to cosign it. I haven't blamed anything yet, we'll need to take stock when things calm down. But it's not gross, eveyone who lives in Socal, or anywhere in CA really, knows fires are a danger. So you have to try to do prevention, and you absolutely can mitigate damage even when it's a different set of plant matter besides forest trees. And you can have better infrastructure, etc. And see my reply to micro, it csn show bad priorities. I think you trying to parse thst absurd video is worse than anything I've said and might display what I'm talking about
I’m completely fine with having conversations about improving fire prevention strategy. Even highlighting mistakes made by public officials, although I might say let’s wait on the post mortem until the fires are actually out. If Newsom or somebody fucked this thing up in specific ways I’d love to hear about them.
This isn’t that. This is a bunch of culture war grifters taking any big news story and trying to connect it to the culture war for attention. They’re corrosive imbeciles anyway, every discussion they touch turns to shit, the fastest way to kill any productive discussion in America is to tie it into some culture war bullshit. But in this case they’re doing it with people losing their homes in a natural disaster and buddy, I don’t know what to tell you, that’s fucking gross and I don’t know what’s wrong with someone to think that’s cool and good.
I think part of this whole thing is acting as a condensation point for everybody’s latent hostility toward LA, and I mean, I fucking get it. LA sucks, buncha shallow narcissists hoping to make it in the movies and none of them will. On racial justice specifically their commitments are a mile wide and an inch deep, everybody willing to nod approvingly about diversity or vote Democrat but they’ve still got the most heinous police force maybe in the country, and keep voting for this shit again and again.
But none of them deserve to lose their homes in a fire, they didn’t bring it on themselves, it isn’t burning because of DEI, and frankly, I think all of that is immediately, transparently obvious. But that’s the narrative those kind of accounts are selling, and anybody willing to do that to win a couple points in the culture war, I’m not convinced that person actually has a soul.
|
This whole carrying people out angle is nonsense anyway.
To start with, if a person is sufficiently large enough that carrying would be an issue, then they're going to be a problem to carry anyway - regardless of who is doing the carrying. That's not even counting the shit ton of gear these people are already carrying.
Secondly, there's so much debri and hose in fires of that severe a situation that tripping is easy. If you're carrying somebody and fall, you're probably getting hurt, or your equipment damaged, and/or the person you're carrying is getting hurt. If a person needs to be moved, they're getting dragged out, which is a much easier method of moving somebody.
This isn't Holywood. Well, in this case it's close, but you know what I mean.
|
On January 13 2025 11:11 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 10:41 Introvert wrote:On January 13 2025 10:35 ChristianS wrote:On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends. Nope, still fucking gross. You’re not even really trying to point out ways the leaders are or have been negligent, you’re just generally gesturing at a bad outcome and saying “well, you know, if we assume that DEI initiatives tend to make an organization less effective, then it’s not impossible that the fires would be less bad if the FD didn’t have DEI initiatives.” They do controlled burns and such sometimes, but in Southern California specifically the whole biome is designed to burn and regrow in the burned soil. Wildfires have functionally infinite fuel to start in. The fires were getting worse every year for a while because of both global and local weather stuff (climate change, but also the drought). Winter is supposed to be our rainy season and the last couple years we had higher-than-average rain so things were better; this year I had been getting increasingly nervous that the rains just weren’t coming. Add in 80 mph Santa Ana winds and this was always going to be really bad. Down here in San Diego we’ve been relatively fortunate, I think our last really bad fire was in 2007 or something, but I know it could happen any time. And if/when it does, you can fucking bet there will be a bunch of right wing ghouls jeering and gloating about how I probably lost my house because there were tampons in the FD men’s bathroom or something, with you and BJ nodding approvingly. You can do what you want, but it fucking sucks and you don’t have to cosign it. I haven't blamed anything yet, we'll need to take stock when things calm down. But it's not gross, eveyone who lives in Socal, or anywhere in CA really, knows fires are a danger. So you have to try to do prevention, and you absolutely can mitigate damage even when it's a different set of plant matter besides forest trees. And you can have better infrastructure, etc. And see my reply to micro, it csn show bad priorities. I think you trying to parse thst absurd video is worse than anything I've said and might display what I'm talking about I’m completely fine with having conversations about improving fire prevention strategy. Even highlighting mistakes made by public officials, although I might say let’s wait on the post mortem until the fires are actually out. If Newsom or somebody fucked this thing up in specific ways I’d love to hear about them. This isn’t that. This is a bunch of culture war grifters taking any big news story and trying to connect it to the culture war for attention. They’re corrosive imbeciles anyway, every discussion they touch turns to shit, the fastest way to kill any productive discussion in America is to tie it into some culture war bullshit. But in this case they’re doing it with people losing their homes in a natural disaster and buddy, I don’t know what to tell you, that’s fucking gross and I don’t know what’s wrong with someone to think that’s cool and good. I think part of this whole thing is acting as a condensation point for everybody’s latent hostility toward LA, and I mean, I fucking get it. LA sucks, buncha shallow narcissists hoping to make it in the movies and none of them will. On racial justice specifically their commitments are a mile wide and an inch deep, everybody willing to nod approvingly about diversity or vote Democrat but they’ve still got the most heinous police force maybe in the country, and keep voting for this shit again and again. But none of them deserve to lose their homes in a fire, they didn’t bring it on themselves, it isn’t burning because of DEI, and frankly, I think all of that is immediately, transparently obvious. But that’s the narrative those kind of accounts are selling, and anybody willing to do that to win a couple points in the culture war, I’m not convinced that person actually has a soul.
Your and Sadist's comment made me realize you think this whole discussion seemingly implies that critics think the people losing their homes deserve it. That didn't even occur to me because it is, quite frankly, silly. No one is saying they deserved it or "too bad so sad." Maybe people with your inclination should also beware of doing what you are condemning others for, rushing to defend some people or institutions because you don't like the people criticizing them. I for my part already hold most major office holders in this state in contempt, so I will try to be fair as well.
I won't speak for BlackJack but I'm saying both that we should wait and that is isn't rediculous to think thst maybe the people whose job it was to keep on top of this type of thing might have failed, for reasons various and sundry.
|
On January 13 2025 12:29 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 11:11 ChristianS wrote:On January 13 2025 10:41 Introvert wrote:On January 13 2025 10:35 ChristianS wrote:On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends. Nope, still fucking gross. You’re not even really trying to point out ways the leaders are or have been negligent, you’re just generally gesturing at a bad outcome and saying “well, you know, if we assume that DEI initiatives tend to make an organization less effective, then it’s not impossible that the fires would be less bad if the FD didn’t have DEI initiatives.” They do controlled burns and such sometimes, but in Southern California specifically the whole biome is designed to burn and regrow in the burned soil. Wildfires have functionally infinite fuel to start in. The fires were getting worse every year for a while because of both global and local weather stuff (climate change, but also the drought). Winter is supposed to be our rainy season and the last couple years we had higher-than-average rain so things were better; this year I had been getting increasingly nervous that the rains just weren’t coming. Add in 80 mph Santa Ana winds and this was always going to be really bad. Down here in San Diego we’ve been relatively fortunate, I think our last really bad fire was in 2007 or something, but I know it could happen any time. And if/when it does, you can fucking bet there will be a bunch of right wing ghouls jeering and gloating about how I probably lost my house because there were tampons in the FD men’s bathroom or something, with you and BJ nodding approvingly. You can do what you want, but it fucking sucks and you don’t have to cosign it. I haven't blamed anything yet, we'll need to take stock when things calm down. But it's not gross, eveyone who lives in Socal, or anywhere in CA really, knows fires are a danger. So you have to try to do prevention, and you absolutely can mitigate damage even when it's a different set of plant matter besides forest trees. And you can have better infrastructure, etc. And see my reply to micro, it csn show bad priorities. I think you trying to parse thst absurd video is worse than anything I've said and might display what I'm talking about I’m completely fine with having conversations about improving fire prevention strategy. Even highlighting mistakes made by public officials, although I might say let’s wait on the post mortem until the fires are actually out. If Newsom or somebody fucked this thing up in specific ways I’d love to hear about them. This isn’t that. This is a bunch of culture war grifters taking any big news story and trying to connect it to the culture war for attention. They’re corrosive imbeciles anyway, every discussion they touch turns to shit, the fastest way to kill any productive discussion in America is to tie it into some culture war bullshit. But in this case they’re doing it with people losing their homes in a natural disaster and buddy, I don’t know what to tell you, that’s fucking gross and I don’t know what’s wrong with someone to think that’s cool and good. I think part of this whole thing is acting as a condensation point for everybody’s latent hostility toward LA, and I mean, I fucking get it. LA sucks, buncha shallow narcissists hoping to make it in the movies and none of them will. On racial justice specifically their commitments are a mile wide and an inch deep, everybody willing to nod approvingly about diversity or vote Democrat but they’ve still got the most heinous police force maybe in the country, and keep voting for this shit again and again. But none of them deserve to lose their homes in a fire, they didn’t bring it on themselves, it isn’t burning because of DEI, and frankly, I think all of that is immediately, transparently obvious. But that’s the narrative those kind of accounts are selling, and anybody willing to do that to win a couple points in the culture war, I’m not convinced that person actually has a soul. Your and Sadist's comment made me realize you think this whole discussion seemingly implies that critics think the people losing their homes deserve it. That didn't even occur to me because it is, quite frankly, silly. No one is saying they deserved it or "too bad so sad." Maybe people with your inclination should also beware of doing what you are condemning others for, rushing to defend some people or institutions because you don't like the people criticizing them. I for my part already hold most major office holders in this state in contempt, so I will try to be fair as well. I won't speak for BlackJack but I'm saying both that we should wait and that is isn't rediculous to think thst maybe the people whose job it was to keep on top of this type of thing might have failed, for reasons various and sundry.
Wait, the conclusion you’re driving toward is just “when the fires are down we should have a deep and honest examination of where our institutions succeeded and failed so we can do better next time?” Great, cool, sign me up.
I can hold this until the post-mortem then, but right now on my list is “national media with millions of eyeballs dedicating their resources to digging through LAFD public messaging for attack material to use in the culture war over DEI.” Sure, okay, maybe I’m over-reading with the “they’re saying LA’s fires are deserved and self-caused because they hate LA” but this shit is actively harmful in the midst of a disaster and it’s also just fucking indecent. Firefighters should be able to do their jobs without being the target of a national propaganda campaign because they said something kinda stupid on some PR video the department asked them to talk about diversity on. I think that whole ecosystem is parasitic.
|
I just don't think people are attacking "firefighters" and while I agree that LA may be one of America's most overrated big cities, I don't see many people cheering on the fires. I think people are skeptical that the political and bureaucratic leadership in the state and the city are really interested in running things properly and are more interested in their pet projects. California is a state where ideological and sectional bona fides are very overvalued imo
There is an interesting dynamic where fires devastate other parts of the state but they aren't national stories, but this one is because it's hit such a wealthy and famous area. Maybe the extra attention will bring some sanity and seriousness back, but I can't be sure.
|
On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends.
So you have any evidence at all that DEI makes the fire department worse at their jobs? Or do you have a PR video clipped by a propagandist? Heck, I haven't even seen any unconvincing hot takes that X town did better than Y town because Y had more black women in their fire department while X had all white men, let alone anything that tries to control for all the confounding factors. But I'd be interested to see the former. Especially if you find evidence that Y town spent an inordinate time having to find solutions to the problem of carrying people to safety while X town had big burly (white) men to lift them on their backs 
Because if all you're saying is that when this is over, there should be an investigation into what went well/wrong and there should be consequences, then we're probably all in agreement. It's just that you pointed out DEI explicitly as a probable main cause in LA's failures as opposed to actual likely things such as the failure of electricity companies to better safeguard power lines, the zoning committees allowing urban sprawl into natural areas making fire control strategies (such as controlled burns) harder to do, or underfunding gutting the fire departments to the point where they can no longer respond adequately to a crisis.
So no, I don't know why you brought up DEI specifically when it's unlikely to be on the list of causes, proximate or otherwise, of the fire control failing. But please do share the (preliminary) evidence you must have to make such a claim!
|
Im pissed because its an immediate jump to DEI or to blame people for fucking fires when they are still actively occuring.
Stop being fucking divisive and help these people out. Its an active disaster jesus christ. At least with mass shootings we wait until its over before debating gun laws.
The really disgusting part to me is the talk of withholding aid. We all know if this wasnt happening in liberal california but in deep red Alabama that wouldnt come up once.
When has a president or a party ever treated citizens experiencing disasters like this? It only seems to happen with Trump. Obama didnt come out and attack Chris Christie when the hurricane hit NJ. Biden didnt do it with hurricanes in Florida or the Carolinas. Trump and his ilks first play is to ALWAYS be divisive. It happened in Puerto Rico and its happening in California.
Grow up and be presidential for once in your fucking life. You represent ALL AMERICANs.
|
On January 13 2025 20:43 Sadist wrote:
Im pissed because its an immediate jump to DEI or to blame people for fucking fires when they are still actively occuring.
Stop being fucking divisive and help these people out. Its an active disaster jesus christ. At least with mass shootings we wait until its over before debating gun laws.
The really disgusting part to me is the talk of withholding aid. We all know if this wasnt happening in liberal california but in deep red Alabama that wouldnt come up once.
When has a president or a party ever treated citizens experiencing disasters like this? It only seems to happen with Trump. Obama didnt come out and attack Chris Christie when the hurricane hit NJ. Biden didnt do it with hurricanes in Florida or the Carolinas. Trump and his ilks first play is to ALWAYS be divisive. It happened in Puerto Rico and its happening in California.
Grow up and be presidential for once in your fucking life. You represent ALL AMERICANs.
Yeah no they don't say we need to come together and not politize school shootings because they give a shit about dead kids. Dead kids in schools is the cost of doing business of having a domestic arms market.
Remeber after paul pelosi was almost murdered by a crazy trying to get after the speaker of the house? They called him a secret gay having a lovers spat and laughed at him.
Remember this is what they voted for and fully understood what they were getting in for. They enjoy this hate from him because its "going against the right people".
|
yeah Trump was specifically elected to not represent all Americans but only them.
|
On January 13 2025 16:34 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 10:13 Introvert wrote:
The thing is the politicians who run the state and those with a positive opinion of them are not going to be seeking answers either. Worrying about the competence of firefighters when the politicians and department themselves don't seems fair game. Meanwhile, the leaders in CA and in LA are going to be quick to blame anything besides their own possible incompetence and the patchwork of laws and policies that means preventing these disasters is more difficult. We'll see after everything is over but one party states not known to select for ability.
Moreover we've known for a long time that removing fuel is an incredibly important part of fire prevention and mitigation, but the ideological predilections of those who run this place mean they won't or can't. The insurance companies know it's risky in this state, and that's why so many are/were not renewing policies.
While DEI might not be a direct cause it could also be a proximate cause and a sign of misplaced priorities, even if establishing a direct link is indirect enough to allow people to cover their own rear ends. So you have any evidence at all that DEI makes the fire department worse at their jobs? Or do you have a PR video clipped by a propagandist? Heck, I haven't even seen any unconvincing hot takes that X town did better than Y town because Y had more black women in their fire department while X had all white men, let alone anything that tries to control for all the confounding factors. But I'd be interested to see the former. Especially if you find evidence that Y town spent an inordinate time having to find solutions to the problem of carrying people to safety while X town had big burly (white) men to lift them on their backs Because if all you're saying is that when this is over, there should be an investigation into what went well/wrong and there should be consequences, then we're probably all in agreement. It's just that you pointed out DEI explicitly as a probable main cause in LA's failures as opposed to actual likely things such as the failure of electricity companies to better safeguard power lines, the zoning committees allowing urban sprawl into natural areas making fire control strategies (such as controlled burns) harder to do, or underfunding gutting the fire departments to the point where they can no longer respond adequately to a crisis. So no, I don't know why you brought up DEI specifically when it's unlikely to be on the list of causes, proximate or otherwise, of the fire control failing. But please do share the (preliminary) evidence you must have to make such a claim!
I very explicitly did not do that. And I have already pointed out that there are steps they probably could have taken to make this less bad and that one of thr main things I'm worried about from leaders in California is their competency. I think it's unlikely we find out or could prove that the fire dept failed somehow because there were too many weak lesbians manning the hoses.
The very post you quote is two paragraphs about the former and only one mentioning the latter. I don't have any problem however, with *skepticism* based on A) the general bad performance of CA leadership, and B) things like that insane video. Maybe don't give people ammo for criticism by saying if you are in need of rescue it's probably your own fault? Just an idea.
Anyway that's where I am. Wait and see, and don't dismiss any potential problems because you don't like the people talking about them.
|
On January 13 2025 15:22 Introvert wrote:
I just don't think people are attacking "firefighters" and while I agree that LA may be one of America's most overrated big cities, I don't see many people cheering on the fires. I think people are skeptical that the political and bureaucratic leadership in the state and the city are really interested in running things properly and are more interested in their pet projects. California is a state where ideological and sectional bona fides are very overvalued imo
There is an interesting dynamic where fires devastate other parts of the state but they aren't national stories, but this one is because it's hit such a wealthy and famous area. Maybe the extra attention will bring some sanity and seriousness back, but I can't be sure.
Has anybody figured out the source of that video yet? The generic B roll and music that sounds like it’s from a pet food commercial makes it sound like a PR video of some kind; my guess is either they show it to potential recruits (“dear potential employee: we know the statistics look like we’re just a bunch of white guys, but don’t worry! We’re working on it!! Go ahead and apply!”) or possibly as a PR thing in 2020 to improve their public image (dear valued taxpayer: we know the statistics look…”). Either way, if I found a video hosted on the LAFD’s website titled something like “The LA Fire Department Values Diversity” I wouldn’t expect to get any information of value out of it.
Right-wing grifters, though, this is gold for them. The reason we’re even discussing this video is because they crawled through anything they could find about the LAFD online looking for ammunition. They don’t link the source, because their purpose is not to inform but to enrage, and watching the rest of the source probably wouldn’t help that objective. If the source were, say, a Breitbart article, maybe they would link it, because clicking that link probably *would* help that objective. This is, fundamentally, propaganda, and they’re whipping up hordes of online followers to call for this person to be fired.
This incidentally looks exactly like that “cancel culture” thing they whine about, but that shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s been paying attention. It’s been obvious for a while that crowd has no objection to the forms or tactics of “cancel culture,” just the targets. Whipping up hordes of online followers to hate specific individuals, maybe to harass them or get them fired, all in service of galvanizing their political allies while intimidating their political enemies? That’s the job, man, that’s what it’s all about, they’ve got no problem with that part. They just didn’t like it being used on Roseanne Barr or Paula Deen or whoever.
|
Northern Ireland23371 Posts
On January 13 2025 23:39 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 15:22 Introvert wrote:
I just don't think people are attacking "firefighters" and while I agree that LA may be one of America's most overrated big cities, I don't see many people cheering on the fires. I think people are skeptical that the political and bureaucratic leadership in the state and the city are really interested in running things properly and are more interested in their pet projects. California is a state where ideological and sectional bona fides are very overvalued imo
There is an interesting dynamic where fires devastate other parts of the state but they aren't national stories, but this one is because it's hit such a wealthy and famous area. Maybe the extra attention will bring some sanity and seriousness back, but I can't be sure. Has anybody figured out the source of that video yet? The generic B roll and music that sounds like it’s from a pet food commercial makes it sound like a PR video of some kind; my guess is either they show it to potential recruits (“dear potential employee: we know the statistics look like we’re just a bunch of white guys, but don’t worry! We’re working on it!! Go ahead and apply!”) or possibly as a PR thing in 2020 to improve their public image (dear valued taxpayer: we know the statistics look…”). Either way, if I found a video hosted on the LAFD’s website titled something like “The LA Fire Department Values Diversity” I wouldn’t expect to get any information of value out of it. Right-wing grifters, though, this is gold for them. The reason we’re even discussing this video is because they crawled through anything they could find about the LAFD online looking for ammunition. They don’t link the source, because their purpose is not to inform but to enrage, and watching the rest of the source probably wouldn’t help that objective. If the source were, say, a Breitbart article, maybe they would link it, because clicking that link probably *would* help that objective. This is, fundamentally, propaganda, and they’re whipping up hordes of online followers to call for this person to be fired. This incidentally looks exactly like that “cancel culture” thing they whine about, but that shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s been paying attention. It’s been obvious for a while that crowd has no objection to the forms or tactics of “cancel culture,” just the targets. Whipping up hordes of online followers to hate specific individuals, maybe to harass them or get them fired, all in service of galvanizing their political allies while intimidating their political enemies? That’s the job, man, that’s what it’s all about, they’ve got no problem with that part. They just didn’t like it being used on Roseanne Barr or Paula Deen or whoever.
Somebody somewhere says something dumb, ergo entire schools of thoughts are dumb. The less context the better, for reasons you’ve neatly outlined.
It’s the modern political equivalent of interviewing random Americans on the street, asking them to point to various countries on a map, showcasing only the geographically un-inclined and holding it up as evidence that all Americans are insular idiots.
This doesn’t preclude discussing these kind of topics, but this particular form of presentation and dissemination is really fundamentally disingenuous.
|
On January 14 2025 00:04 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2025 23:39 ChristianS wrote:On January 13 2025 15:22 Introvert wrote:
I just don't think people are attacking "firefighters" and while I agree that LA may be one of America's most overrated big cities, I don't see many people cheering on the fires. I think people are skeptical that the political and bureaucratic leadership in the state and the city are really interested in running things properly and are more interested in their pet projects. California is a state where ideological and sectional bona fides are very overvalued imo
There is an interesting dynamic where fires devastate other parts of the state but they aren't national stories, but this one is because it's hit such a wealthy and famous area. Maybe the extra attention will bring some sanity and seriousness back, but I can't be sure. Has anybody figured out the source of that video yet? The generic B roll and music that sounds like it’s from a pet food commercial makes it sound like a PR video of some kind; my guess is either they show it to potential recruits (“dear potential employee: we know the statistics look like we’re just a bunch of white guys, but don’t worry! We’re working on it!! Go ahead and apply!”) or possibly as a PR thing in 2020 to improve their public image (dear valued taxpayer: we know the statistics look…”). Either way, if I found a video hosted on the LAFD’s website titled something like “The LA Fire Department Values Diversity” I wouldn’t expect to get any information of value out of it. Right-wing grifters, though, this is gold for them. The reason we’re even discussing this video is because they crawled through anything they could find about the LAFD online looking for ammunition. They don’t link the source, because their purpose is not to inform but to enrage, and watching the rest of the source probably wouldn’t help that objective. If the source were, say, a Breitbart article, maybe they would link it, because clicking that link probably *would* help that objective. This is, fundamentally, propaganda, and they’re whipping up hordes of online followers to call for this person to be fired. This incidentally looks exactly like that “cancel culture” thing they whine about, but that shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s been paying attention. It’s been obvious for a while that crowd has no objection to the forms or tactics of “cancel culture,” just the targets. Whipping up hordes of online followers to hate specific individuals, maybe to harass them or get them fired, all in service of galvanizing their political allies while intimidating their political enemies? That’s the job, man, that’s what it’s all about, they’ve got no problem with that part. They just didn’t like it being used on Roseanne Barr or Paula Deen or whoever. Somebody somewhere says something dumb, ergo entire schools of thoughts are dumb. The less context the better, for reasons you’ve neatly outlined. It’s the modern political equivalent of interviewing random Americans on the street, asking them to point to various countries on a map, showcasing only the geographically un-inclined and holding it up as evidence that all Americans are insular idiots. This doesn’t preclude discussing these kind of topics, but this particular form of presentation and dissemination is really fundamentally disingenuous.
Or going to college campuses loaded with sources and trained in debate so you can film yourself dunking on them from behind a table, cut it up and post it online to build a following.
I'm sure no one has done something silly like that to build their entire brand and no one would be dumb enough to think them genius debaters with a superior intellectual positon after watching that content.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
