Hardly new. They've been against emergency assistance to Blue states for over a decade.
Hardly new. They've been against emergency assistance to Blue states for over a decade.Don't get us wrong. There is plenty of reason to hate MAGA and this topic is a shining example.
'What The F**k Is Wrong With You?': Jon Stewart Burns GOPers Over Ugliest New Hypocrisy
“They don’t deserve anything, to be honest with you, unless they show us they’re going to make some changes,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) told Newsmax in one clip.
MAGA propaganda already has them believing that no one lifted a finger or provided a dollar to the hurricane / flood victims in the Southeast last year.Speak some fucking plain language people. Yes you can call this disgusting, you can call that obscene, you can call that horrible. You can say things like, we have never try to withhold aid from a red state in a natural disaster, but can you imagine the outrage if we did? And rightfully so. What the Republicans are doing is absolutely disgusting.
This should be followed with a statement that Ds will not vote for one single dollar of aid when yet another $50B storm hits the southeast if funding for CA is not provided.
View attachment 114920
But if you call out republicans shit behavior you'll alienate people like greenman by hurting their feelings. /sI'm still waiting for some fucking major Democrats to grow a brain and a fucking spine. You literally have Republican senators and politicians talking about withholding aid to California in a natural disaster.
Speak some fucking plain language people. Yes you can call this disgusting, you can call that obscene, you can call that horrible. You can say things like, we have never try to withhold aid from a red state in a natural disaster, but can you imagine the outrage if we did? And rightfully so. What the Republicans are doing is absolutely disgusting.
Why can't Democrats say simple shit like that? That's what people need not fancy talk that what's kind of hides the actual horrificness of what's going on.
Democrats will never fucking learn how to fight properly
being fire resisteant, and being able to withstand the heat doesn't mean it can be immune to being stained, or immune to discoloration, or covered in ash. No house surrounded by fire of this magnetude would come out perfectly white with no indication of a fire every happening around it, such as no ash on it's surface, or it's roof, as well as no discoloration. also, the page is a sales pitch, nothing more, which also it states that fires start from the inside out.. that is extreamely misleading and not really fully factual, specially from external fire surrounding structures. most structures that survive do so due to changes in direction of the fire, due to wind or other reasons.. There are many houses that have survived such fires that are built no different than the houses surrounding them that burnt to the ground.. But even those houses had evidence of a fire them on their surfaces.Maybe you should try thinking harder.
https://www.finehomebuilding.com/1995/06/01/fire-resistant-details
See, that's why nothing gets done. Doing things costs money.Nothing can be done because it is out of our control.
Nothing will be done because it is just too expensive and unrealistic.
But we'll keep increasing taxes and regulations for your own good!
Don't get us wrong. There is plenty of reason to hate MAGA and this topic is a shining example.
'What The F**k Is Wrong With You?': Jon Stewart Burns GOPers Over Ugliest New Hypocrisy
“They don’t deserve anything, to be honest with you, unless they show us they’re going to make some changes,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) told Newsmax in one clip.
being fire resisteant, and being able to withstand the heat doesn't mean it can be immune to being stained, or immune to discoloration, or covered in ash. No house surrounded by fire of this magnetude would come out perfectly white with no indication of a fire every happening around it, such as no ash on it's surface, or it's roof, as well as no discoloration. also, the page is a sales pitch, nothing more, which also it states that fires start from the inside out.. that is extreamely misleading and not really fully factual, specially from external fire surrounding structures. most structures that survive do so due to changes in direction of the fire, due to wind or other reasons.. There are many houses that have survived such fires that are built no different than the houses surrounding them that burnt to the ground.. But even those houses had evidence of a fire them on their surfaces.
I call bullshit. It would still have evidence of a fire on the outside, including broken and cracked windows from the heat of the surrounding fire, as well as chared landscap.. do you notice that there is no evidence of fire reaching the shrubry behind it, or in front of it. which shows the fire never really reached the house. Even if it i you saw the house up close in person right after the fire, which is the only way you could confirm the picture's authenticity (doubtful, as only owners would be allowed into the area), and it did survive just as the picture shows, it had less to do with it's construction, and more to do with change in direction of the fire, which is demonstrated by the greanery around it. You are falling for a sales pitch.I lived in Orange County in 1993 and yeah that house survived exactly like it was in the pictures. I remember the 1993 Laguna Beach fires because I experienced them live long before Social Media etc.. Living in Lake Forest CA at the time I remember watching the fire climbing the hillsides.
I call bullshit. It would still have evidence of a fire on the outside, including broken and cracked windows from the heat of the surrounding fire. Even if it is true, that you saw the house up close in person right after the fire, which is the only way you could confirm the picture's authenticity (doubtful, as only owners would be allowed into the area), it had little to do with it's construction, and more to do with change in direction of the fire. You are falling for a sales pitch.
read my edit, the fire never really reached the house, which is demonstrated by the greenry, untouched by the fire, that is still around the house. you are fallling for a sales pitch. You even admit that it was a "couple weeks" later it looked fine, giving reasons why, demonstrating you really don't know the true impact the fire had on it. regardless the picture itself shows the fire never fully reached the house to begin with. Don't get me wrong, construction and the materials does play a part in helping a structure to surviving longer in a fire, but it won't prevent it from not burning down if given enough time, or from not showing any visual indications, or evidence of a fire. But see, here is the difference between you and me.. I am not getting my information from a sales pitch. I am getting my infromation from 2 generations of construction trades, as well as direct faimly members houses that survived fires as all the ones around them burned to the ground. And non of them had to do with their construction.. Just as the picture in that sales pitch, the fire never made it to houses, they changed direction and didn't even burn all the greenery surround them.. or do you think common grass is magical?Define right after the fire? It was a couple of weeks later and it looked fine. Maybe it had been cleaned up some after the fire but the key thing is the house was still standing even if some minor repairs like painting was required. I also disagree it had little do with it's construction because what you saying is in direct disagreement with CalFire and other CA fire agencies for building homes in the California Urban Wildland Interface. I will trust them over some random guy on the Internet but to each his own.
Here is the latest information from San Diego County where I live in the Wildland-Urban interface.
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/pds/docs/pds664.pdf
read my edit, the fire never really reached the house, which is demonstrated by the greenry, untouched by the fire, that is still around the house. you are fallling for a sales pitch. You even admit that it was a "couple weeks" later it looked fine, giving reasons why, demonstrating you really don't know the true impact the fire had on it. regardless the picture itself shows the fire never fully reached the house to begin with. Don't get me wrong, construction and the materials does play a part in helping a structure to surviving longer in a fire, but it won't prevent it from not burning down if given enough time, or from not showing any visual indications, or evidence of a fire. But see, here is the difference between you and me.. I am not getting my information from a sales pitch. I am getting my infromation from 2 generations of construction trades, as well as direct faimly members houses that survived fires as all the ones around them burned to the ground. And non of them had to do with their construction.. Just as the picture in that sales pitch, the fire never made it to houses, they changed direction and didn't even burn all the greenery surround them.. or do you think common grass is magical?
I found this to be a interesting personal interest story:
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6061066/2025/01/14/olympic-swimmer-gary-hall-jr-medals-replaced/
That's just fucking scummy.
Also if you have important stuff keep it in a fire safe.
Shame that ticket burned in the fire as well.That's just fucking scummy.