While Democrats don't get it because they like to pretend we have an endless pile of money that we can hand out, former Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta gets it and may just have delivered the best remarks I have ever seen from a foreign leader on the subject. His remarks have gone viral, and it's easy to see why. He's talking about countries/leaders who are upset about the freeze on the money and that Trump might not just give out blank checks anymore.
Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok
·
Former president of Kenya mocks countries who are upset Trump that said he won’t give blank checks anymore to foreign governments.
“Why are you crying? It’s not your government! He has no reason to give you anything. You don’t pay taxes in America.”
11:33 AM · Jan 29, 2025
"Why are you crying? It's not your government, it's not your country," he says to cheers from the audience he was speaking on Wednesday at the East Africa Health Security Summit in Mombasa, Kenya.
"He has no reason to give you anything...You don't pay taxes in America. He's appealing to his people," he continued.
"This is a wake-up call for you to say, 'What are we going to do to help ourselves, instead of crying,'" he declared to more clapping.
"What are we going to do, yah, to support ourselves? Because nobody is going to continue holding out a hand there to give you. It is time to use our resources for the right things. We are the ones using them for the wrong things."
The director of employee and labor relations at the US Agency for International Development has been placed on administrative leave after a stunning refusal to follow directions given by President Trump's transition team.
President Trump followed up his rampage through the National Labor Relations Board (Trump Goes Pearl Harbor on the National Labor Relations Board, Fires Chairman and General Counsel) by firing two Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioners and its general counsel. The newly reduced EEOC can no longer bring enforcement actions or initiate rulemaking as it doesn't have a quorum. //
Under Joe Biden, the EEOC bullied companies into submitting to DEI and replacing Equality with Equity.
Much like the defenestrated acting chairman at the NLRB, the two fired Democrats were not happy about the cruel turn of fate. //
Unlike the NLRB commissioner, whose firing seems questionable because the law says NLRB commissioners can only be fired for cause, the EEOC's enabling legislation does not require that.
The EEOC now only has two members and cannot act until President Trump nominates replacements. This is mostly a good thing.
I think there is something else going on with these firings. It seems like the Trump White House may be teeing up a challenge to a Supreme Court case.
In 2020, the CFPB was challenged for its blatantly unconstitutional structure. Under the law, it was managed by a single director who could only be removed "for cause." The Supreme Court agreed that allowing a single individual to control an agency outside the reach of the president to remove them was unconstitutional.
I believe the target of Trump's removal of three commissioners, one who can only be removed for cause and two without similar protections, is to convince the Supreme Court to overturn Humphrey's Executor vs. United States. This 1935 decision held that the president could only remove the commissioner of independent agencies for reasons established by Congress. The Selia decision established that did not apply to single commissioners; Trump wants to take a run at it to see if he can get that precedent overturned the way Chevron was reversed last summer; //
We'll see how this turns out, but even if Trump is wrong, the NLRB and EEOC will not be lumbering about the countryside and disturbing the livestock until the Supreme Court speaks. //
OrneryCoot
3 hours ago
There is something inherently wrong with the idea that the leader of the executive branch of government cannot fire persons under his authority, tasked with implementing his policy, in the executive branch. That is all kinds of "only in Washington" dumb. Trump is right to blast through that and try to tee up a SCOTUS decision. In the meantime, I will breathe a sigh of relief that these people are removed from their positions of power. Democrat appointed workers in the administrative state are open sores that need to be cut out.
There's good news for federal employees who were unhappy to learn they were expected to return to working in the office under the new Trump administration: They have another option — a buyout.
The White House will issue a memo Tuesday offering to pay federal workers who don't want to return to the office through Sept. 30, as long as they resign by Feb. 6, an administration official tells Axios. //
There's good news for federal employees who were unhappy to learn they were expected to return to working in the office under the new Trump administration: They have another option — a buyout.
The White House will issue a memo Tuesday offering to pay federal workers who don't want to return to the office through Sept. 30, as long as they resign by Feb. 6, an administration official tells Axios. //
We're five years past COVID and just 6 percent of federal employees work full-time in office. That is unacceptable," a senior administration official tells Axios.
- The White House expects 5% to 10% of federal employees to accept the offer, which would potentially mean hundreds of thousands of people.
- The administration projects the buyouts could ultimately save taxpayers up to $100 billion a year.
Zoom out: The offer applies to all full-time federal employees, except for military personnel, the Postal Service, and those working in immigration enforcement or national security. //
Further details of the offer — and the administration's approach — can be found at the Office of Personnel Management website under the heading "Fork in the Road": https://www.opm.gov/fork //
With a federal workforce of two million employees, if between 5 and 10 percent of them accept the offer, that means up to 200,000 may elect to leave federal employment. And, realistically, the ones who do are those most likely to not be in sync with the Trump administration's policies and aims, so...win-win, right?
President Trump has ordered as many as 60 senior bureaucrats in the US Agency for International Development placed on indefinite leave for taking actions to evade his executive orders. A memo from acting USAID administrator Jason Gray says, "We have identified several actions within USAID that appear to be designed to circumvent the president’s executive orders and the mandate from the American people.“ As a result, we have placed a number of USAID employees on administrative leave with full pay and benefits until further notice while we complete our analysis of these actions.”
This action effectively shuts down most of USAID's $22.6 billion in program support. //
This review will be painful in some places, but that is a small price to pay for stamping out the "I know better" ethos so present in the senior executive and foreign service. //
Locked and Loaded
2 hours ago
“This is a huge morale hit,” said a former senior Trump administration official who was also told of the move. “This is the leadership of the agency. This is like taking out all the generals. I don't know what they hope to accomplish by it.”
And that's why you are a former Trump administration official. //
SC Patriot EzraTank
2 hours ago
Administrative Leave is the first step in firing for cause. If the investigation confirms willful disobedience of lawful directives from the President they'll be terminated for cause, meaning they can't be rehired elsewhere in the Federal Government and it isn't going to look good on their resume. Diligently following the administrative process steps for termination will ensure they cannot later file a wrongful termination lawsuit or claim an EEOC action, protecting the American taxpayer further.
BRENNAN: You know FEMA has specialized expertise that some of these states just don't have in their arsenal...
VANCE: Oh, Margaret, I wish that they...
BRENNAN: And how will these states who are lower-income states, the Mississippis, the Kentuckys, the Alabamas, be able to do this for themselves without federal help?
VANCE: Well, the president, to be clear, is not saying we are going to leave anybody behind. He's saying that the way in which we administrator these resources, some of which is coming from the federal level, some of which is coming from the state level, we've got to get the bureaucrats out of the way and get the aid to the people who need it most.
Look at the disgust on her face as she calls red states "low-income" hellholes that can't possibly manage themselves without overpaid, useless federal bureaucrats telling them what to do. Notice that she didn't bother to mention California, though, which has shown a lack of ability to effectively respond to natural disasters. Instead, she only sneers at those uneducated rubes in the "Mississippis, Kentuckys, and Alabamas."
That's not an accident. People like Brennan live in a bubble where they truly think credentialism and dollar totals on a spreadsheet dictate competency. For example, calling the above states "low-income" and suggesting that makes them incapable ignores that the cost of living exists. Incomes are indeed lower in Southern states but so are costs, which means the standard of living is not necessarily any worse than high-cost blue states.
Yet, Brennan sees the average income and just assumes everyone in Alabama is an idiot because that's the mindset held by Beltway dwellers such as herself. They can't fathom that other people are not only just as smart as they are but in many cases, are smarter. There's a reason the top states in the country regarding economic growth and employment are almost exclusively Republican-led states, many that Brennan would claim are "low-income."
The reality is that the federal bureaucracies have shown themselves to be the most incompetent entities in the country. If they had "specialized expertise" that simply can't be replicated at the state level, then North Carolinians wouldn't still be living in tents right now.
Americans imagine that inside every Chinese person an American is struggling to get out. But China is different, so different that the categories of Western political science are meaningless. China will not change because we think it should, or because we want it to, or because we exhort the Chinese to embrace the benefits of democracy and free markets. If it changes, it will do so very slowly. We shall have to deal with China as it is, and has been for thousands of years. We can demonstrate the superiority of our system with economic growth, technological innovation, and military strength—although we haven’t done so of late. We can show that our ways are better—when we stick to our ways—and set an example. But we can’t change China by preaching to the Chinese.
China’s unique geographic conditions required from antiquity a centralized tax system to fund infrastructure and a centralized bureaucracy to administer it. It never persuaded the peoples it absorbed into the Chinese empire to speak a common language or to confess the same religion. Ethnicity has no role in Chinese statehood. //
When Chinese dynasties failed, either because of internal corruption or natural disaster, bandit rebellions replaced them. China has no hereditary aristocracy, unlike Europe, because the new dynasty levels the ground that preceded it. The Communist Party of China arose as a bandit rebellion in China’s classic historical pattern, and governs as a new incarnation of China’s ancient Mandarin caste. In place of the old Mandarin exam based on Chinese classics, China now has the gaokao, the fearsome university entrance exam. The biggest difference between today’s Communists and the old Mandarins is that the CCP is larger and more comprehensive, with nearly 100 million members.
China’s Emperor is not a revered demigod on the Japanese model, or an anointed sovereign claiming divine right, but simply the one ruler whose job it is to prevent all the other would-be rulers from killing each other. He is Lucky Luciano, the capo di capi whose function is to keep the peace among the underbosses who fear him more than they fear each other. And, to extend the metaphor, the CCP is Marxist in the same way the Mafia is Catholic; both organizations take their ideology seriously, although its practical significance is limited. The Chinese people therefore don’t love their emperor, any more than rank-and-file Mafia soldiers love the capo. They say resignedly, “Without an emperor, we’d kill each other.” And that is just what they have done in the tragic periods when imperial dynasties collapsed.
President Trump summarily dismissed 17 agency inspectors general Friday night in a move that caught official Washington by surprise.
The inspectors general were dismissed via emails from the White House Presidential Personnel Office, with no notice sent to lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who have pledged bipartisan support for the watchdogs, in advance of the firings, the person said. The emails gave no substantive explanation for the dismissals, with at least one citing “changing priorities” for the move, the person added. //
I'm sure this is heading to court, and it is a good bet that the Supreme Court will eventually decide that Congress can't put that kind of leash on the president's ability to fire a presidential appointee.
This move is curious. If it isn't simply an impulsive act, the Trump White House may be using this court case to audition arguments that can be used on another Congressional "permission" case, like a challenge to the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. //
NavyVet
7 hours ago
If IGs "are supposed to root out fraud, waste, abuse, and lawbreaking" they were an abysmal failure during Biden's term. Fraud, waste, abuse, and lawbreaking were rampant and they did nothing of note to stop it.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a statement. “President Trump is dismantling checks on his power and paving the way for widespread corruption.”
Oh, that's rich. After four years of the brazen fraud, waste, abuse, and lawbreaking of the Biden Crime Family, and his entire "administration", she wants to claim it's Trump? Classic!
It wasnt me NavyVet
6 hours ago
IG's need to be their own Department.
An IG can't start a prosecution. They have to go to the DOJ. The DOJ requires the FBI to also investigate.
So no real prosecutions can happen to the DOJ or the FBI.
They need their own prosecutors and able to empanel their own Grand Juries.
It's already difficult enough with Qualified Immunity and the Thin Blue Line.
Musicman
6 hours ago
The whole idea of an inspector general is constitutionally suspect. Whose job is it to investigate malfeasance by the executive branch? Congress! The reason IG’s have been created is a combination of the failure of Congress and the refusal by executive offices to provide evidence requested, sometimes even subpoenaed, by Congress. And the refusal of the DOJ to enforce Congressional subpoenas, and punish those who disobey them.
We don’t need IG’s, we need Congress to do it’s job and have the power to appoint investigators who have unfettered access to Executive Branch materials, computer systems and documents so that no Administration of either Party can stonewall investigations.
On January 17, 1961, in this farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned against the establishment of a "military-industrial complex."
In a speech of less than 10 minutes, on January 17, 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower delivered his political farewell to the American people on national television from the Oval Office of the White House. Those who expected the military leader and hero of World War II to depart his Presidency with a nostalgic, "old soldier" speech like Gen. Douglas MacArthur's, were surprised at his strong warnings about the dangers of the "military-industrial complex."
As President of the United States for two terms, Eisenhower had slowed the push for increased defense spending despite pressure to build more military equipment during the Cold War’s arms race. Nonetheless, the American military services and the defense industry had expanded a great deal in the 1950s. Eisenhower thought this growth was needed to counter the Soviet Union, but it confounded him. Though he did not say so explicitly, his standing as a military leader helped give him the credibility to stand up to the pressures of this new, powerful interest group. He eventually described it as a necessary evil.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. . . . American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
In Tuesday X post, Musk's DOGE wrote that the U.S. spends about 3 cents to mint each penny, which, of course, is only valued at 1 cent.
"The penny costs over 3 cents to make and cost U.S. taxpayers over $179 million in FY2023," DOGE wrote. "The Mint produced over 4.5 billion pennies in FY2023, around 40% of the 11.4 billion coins for circulation produced."
In pointing out the penny's costliness, DOGE is taking aim at an issue that has sparked debate for years, although the price of manufacturing the cent has only grown over the past several years. In 2016, for instance, the U.S. was spending about 1.5 cents to mint each penny, or less than half of its current manufacturing cost. //
The only question remains this: Will we have to start offering our pensive friends and acquaintances a nickel for their thoughts? And are they worth it?
The Washington Free Beacon first reported that it obtained a copy of the "One Flag Policy" order, which permits only the American flag to be flown at U.S. facilities at home and abroad, with two notable exceptions: the Prisoner of War/Missing in Action (POW/MIA) emblem and the Wrongful Detainees Flag.
"Starting immediately, only the United States of America flag is authorized to be flown or displayed at U.S. facilities, both domestic and abroad, and featured in U.S. government content," the memo states, according to the outlet. "The flag of the United States of America united all Americans under the universal principles of justice, liberty, and democracy. These values, which are the bedrock of our great country, are shared by all American citizens, past and present."
There is a case to be made for going much further, to return the federal government to what the Founders intended; to pare it once more back to its proper constitutional boundaries. This will go beyond trimming the fat; this will involve cutting the imperial colossus our federal government has become down to the bone, and then paring away some of the bone.
For the first installment of this series, let us discuss the proper role of government.
Some years back, I heard a comment that has stuck in my head ever since: “What government does for anyone, it should do for everyone, or it should do for no one.” This, in a nutshell, sums up the proper relationship of government to the citizens. //
is not the proper role of government to shield people from the consequences of their bad decisions. There will always be a need for a modern, prosperous society to care for the truly helpless, such as people disabled through no fault of their own, children with no adults to care for them, and so forth. But the lazy, the indigent, the irresponsible – they have no moral claim on the fruits of the labor of the industrious. The government, and only the government, has the power to tax – to claim a portion of your resources with the force of law, with the implied threat of armed force if you try to abstain. In our age of ever-increasing welfare entitlements, that government has claimed a portion of every taxpayer’s proceeds toward just such a shield – requiring the industrious to toil longer and harder to support the indigent. //
It is the nature of government to grow, to become ever more intrusive; it is the nature of government that it is inefficient, even wasteful. Examples of this abound. Our republic was founded on the overriding principle that government must be constrained. No less an authority on the founding principles of our nation than George Washington said, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” He was exactly correct; and the American people must remember that however dangerous, government and its various elected and appointed officials and their hirelings are our servants, not our masters. And if necessary, we should call on them to remember, as well. That is why the federal government should — must — be once more returned to its original constitutional limits.
President Trump's State Department transition team has asked scores of bureaucrats to resign from their positions no later than noon on Monday. The focus of the changes seems aimed at gutting the notoriously recalcitrant, hidebound, and, yes, leftist State Department staff and preventing any centers of resistance from forming as Marco Rubio builds his team. //
Rubio's team is forcing out basically all of State's second tier leadership and replacing them with handpicked personnel, including people called out of retirement. //
GBenton
3 hours ago
Should I call a doctor NOW? This has lasted since November 5th and shows no signs of letting up.
Damocles GBenton
3 hours ago
I'm not a doctor, but I play one on the weekends.... and I diagnose you with Winning!
Right now there is no cure, so enjoy...
It’s conservatives who don’t want the government to restrict our speech or gas-powered vehicles or Covid therapeutics. So why are we up in arms over what, according to the “science,” could be a fairly innocuous synthetic color additive made from petroleum, chemically known as erythrosine?
A better question may be: Why was this chemical with zero nutritional value put in our food in the first place? The artificial food coloring was added to make unhealthy food options attractive to kids. The ingredient is often found alongside sugar in foods such as candy, cereal, and juices. Removing the chemical does not deprive anyone of a positive good. Taste will not be sacrificed, simply one tactic to market junk food to kids. Natural ingredients that lack harmful effects, such as beets, are the alternatives to color foods in other countries where the dye has been banned. //
Furthermore, the debate also highlights the difference between conservatives and libertarians. Conservatives are not opposed to government intervention. We’re opposed to ill-defined government intervention, wielded by an unelected bureaucracy captured by corporations, that lacks the support of those who are supposed to have the ultimate say: we the people.
There is much to be said for the new administration’s plan to have a nongovernmental organization investigate how well, or how badly, government agencies are currently handling the taxpayers’ money. But there is a limit to how much money can be recovered by simply cutting back on “waste, fraud and abuse” in federal spending.
There are, however, additional billions of dollars that could be tapped, from a source that not many people think about. That is the vast—almost unbelievable—amount of land owned by the federal government. Some of that land—such as military bases—is used to house the government’s own operations. But the great majority of that land is not.
The rest of this government-owned land is so vast that there is little to compare it with—except whole countries. And not small countries like Belgium or Portugal. The amount of land owned by the National Park Service alone is larger than Italy. The land owned by the Fish and Wildlife Service is larger than Germany. The land owned by the Forest Service is larger than Britain and Spain combined. The land owned by the Bureau of Land Management is larger than Japan, North Korea, South Korea and the Philippines combined.
The idea of selling huge amounts of government-owned land is not new. Before the federal income tax was created in the early 20th century, land sales were sometimes a significant source of federal government income in the preceding two centuries. The prospect of large-scale land sales was considered during the Reagan administration, but the political opposition was too strong.
As of 2015, government-owned lands were valued at $1.8 trillion by the Commerce Department. This is the kind of money that can make a real contribution to the government’s fiscal balance, at a time when so many government operations are urgently in need of support.
As for the current value of these lands to the government, that value is largely negative. The money that these lands bring in is often only a fraction of what it costs the government to take care of them. Wildfires on land managed by the federal government have been about five times the size of wildfires on “non-federal lands,” according to a 2022 study by the Congressional Budget Office.
Land transferred from federal ownership to the market economy can also contribute to more affordable housing. When the same kind of house costs several times more in one part of the country than elsewhere, it is often because the cost of the land is higher rather than because the house costs more to build. That in turn is often because the land is either more scarce or because of laws restricting the building of anything on that land. But, where more land is available to build on, the same kind of house can cost a fraction of what it costs elsewhere.
The federal government owns a little more than one-fourth of the total land area of the United States. The time is long overdue to consider whether that is the best economic arrangement. And reconsideration is especially needed at a time of urgent fiscal problems.
Souza
@soarathena
Here’s another cool thing I stumbled upon. Not as cool as yours, hah, but it sort of blew me away too.
This was written in 1973 - literally calls out this election as being consequential to eliminating corruption:
“We have noted that corruption appears to visit the White House in fifty-year cycles. This suggests that exposure and retribution inoculate the Presidency against its latent criminal impulses for about half a century. Around the year 2023 the American people would be well advised to go on the alert and start nailing down everything in sight.”
—Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Imperial Presidency
11:40 PM · Jan 9, 2025
·
Battleboy
@JohnMercer62573
·
Jan 10
Biden has been in DC for THE ENTIRE 50 YEAR CYCLE...
Representative Mike Waltz, President Trump's choice to lead the National Security Council, said in an interview published Thursday that all current civil service members of the NSC who are detailed from another agency are expected to be out of the building as soon as Trump is sworn in.
“Everybody is going to resign at 12:01 on January 20,” Waltz said. “We’re working through our process to get everybody their clearances and through the transition process now. Our folks know who we want out in the agencies, we’re putting those requests in, and in terms of the detailees they’re all going to go back.”
What Waltz, a retired Special Forces colonel, is reacting to is the obstruction and leaks from the NSC staff on loan from other agencies that damaged Trump's agenda in his first term. He plans to get rid of people who may have made a career as part of the "interagency process" and have more loyalty to that process than they do to Trump. //
Alexander S. Vindman 🇺🇸
@AVindman
·
Follow
Statement on National Security Staff Firings
Yesterday, President Trump’s National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz @michaelgwaltz , announced a sweeping directive to terminate all national security staffers loaned from other departments and agencies who serve in apolitical,… Show more
2:34 PM · Jan 10, 2025 //
Nah, you were fired for leaking a privileged conversation to a co-conspirator who then had himself labeled a "whistleblower" to create a fake fact case for impeaching President Trump. And also for being a treasonous oxygen thief. //
There is an admitted danger in groupthink. We can see that in the way the Biden NSC has coddled Iran, China, and Russia in the misguided view that in some bizarro universe, they would become useful members of the international community. Dissent doesn't need to be hashed out at the staff level. Also, I don't think anyone in the Trump administration is interested in "continuity of policy" with Biden because his foreign policy failures, both active and in terms of missed opportunities, are the stuff of legend. //
You have to admire how Vindman categorizes himself as a "talented professional" who was dismissed for taking "principled stances or offering objective advice." Actually, the role of making policy in civil service is the realm of political appointees. The career staff are supposed to serve every president loyally. The last thing needed in the NSC are staffers who are first and foremost loyal to "the way we've always done it," who are overly concerned about the agency "equities" at stake when decisions are made, and who see themselves as players in policy in their own right. //
John Q. Public
3 minutes ago
LOL at the tags…
Douchenozzle is correct.
Also, when he says, “tens of thousands of senior apolitical government officials” he is unintentionally letting slip how many actually need to be fired.
One of the primary drivers of the devastation has been a lack of water due to unfilled reservoirs in Los Angeles County and unmaintained, failing infrastructure that caused fire hydrants to run dry. As RedState reported, the Ynez Reservoir was taken offline for maintenance during wildfire season, a decision that has turned out to be catastrophic.
When three 1-million-gallon capacity water storage tanks in Pacific Palisades went dry Tuesday night, firefighters were forced to abandon efforts to save thousands of homes. LA Department of Water and Power (LADWP) CEO Janisse Quiñones has repeatedly claimed during press conferences that her utility did everything it could to prepare for the forecasted wind event and support the Los Angeles Fire Department as it responded, but left out one key fact: The Santa Ynez Reservoir in the hills above Pacific Palisades, which holds 117 million gallons of water and normally feeds those tanks, had been drained and taken offline for repairs to its cover even though the state's brush fire season was ongoing. //
Is Quiñones a unique talent, though? She sure doesn't seem to be given how badly and quickly the infrastructure failed in this case. Not filling the Ynez Reservoir for wildfire season was bad enough, but clearly, the water pumping facilities and hydrant system were not prepared for what should have been treated as an inevitability. For context, the hydrant issue has been known about since at least 2021.
What Quiñones did do well, though, is push the preferred narratives of the far-left. When Bass hired her, the mayor touted the new "CEO" as a person who could shift the city to "100% clean energy," but take a wild guess what else Quiñones was really concerned with? If you said "equity" and "social justice," collect your winnings at the window: //
Bearsblow
8 hours ago
They're achieving equity! The rich and the poor are suddenly homeless!!
Well done Janisse Quiñones. You deserve a raise!
Here’s the reality: it is a battle zone. An existential fight over the future of America. Is this massive progressive failure the norm that we should just accept as the new American reality, or are we going to look to a new way forward, one that focuses on excellence, competence and innovation over identity politics, a lowering of our standards, and an acceptance of mediocrity (or worse)?
Many including myself have been writing for years about the decline of the Golden State—and Democrat-run cities in general—but the progressive assault continues in Chicago, St. Louis, Oakland, Seattle, New York, San Francisco… the list goes on. Could this disaster be the wake-up call to America that their warped priorities and policies simply aren’t working? //
The list of failures in this disaster could fill a lengthy tome—the decades of water mismanagement and the continued failure to adequately supply LA, though it’s well within our means to do so, the refusal to capture the billions of gallons of rainwater, opting to instead let it just flow out to the Pacific Ocean while we are told to let our lawns die, the focus at the LAFD on DEI and LGBTQ instead of actual firefighting, the billions thrown at the homeless-industrial complex with almost nothing to show for it except more homeless people…
Is this what the future of America looks like? In too many cities, it already does, with Third-World country conditions prevailing, but do we want to see that everywhere? //
Altadena and the Pacific Palisades in particular look like battlegrounds as of this writing—the images reveal a hellscape that looks like it’s been carpet-bombed by our enemies for months.
Los Angeles and the entire state of California have become a battleground for ideas. Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election shows very clearly that many Americans have woken up and are starting to reject the progressive worldview—but remember, it was just four, short years ago they voted in a man who turned out to be the most divisive, spite-filled president in our history. The battle is far from over.
LA Department of Water and Power (LADWP) CEO Janisse Quiñones has repeatedly claimed during press conferences that her utility did everything it could to prepare for the forecasted wind event and support the Los Angeles Fire Department as it responded, but left out one key fact: the Santa Ynez Reservoir in the hills above Pacific Palisades, which holds 117 million gallons of water and normally feeds those tanks, had been drained and taken offline for repairs to its cover even though the state's brush fire season was ongoing. //
A LADWP spokesperson said in a statement to the LA Times that the utility was "still evaluating the effect of the reservoir being placed offline, and that staffers were conducting a root-cause analysis." The spokesperson added, “Our primary focus is to provide water supply throughout the city. The system was never designed for a wildfire scenario that we are experiencing.”
Why not? The system, at least in the Palisades, is in an area where a suburban area adjoins rural, difficult-to-access mountains and canyons, and where wildfire risk is often high. //
Anon, good nurse!
10 hours ago
This all boils down to 117 million gallons of water to fight a raging wildfire rather than 3 million, right? Like, it seems like a lot of words to avoid the obvious fact that 117 is a lot more than 3....
Also, whatever happened to "if it saves one life...."? Are we not doing that anymore?
JohnV1787 Anon, good nurse!
9 hours ago
I was thinking that too. Maybe the water pressure, uphill pumping and other physics don't make it possible to keep those 3 tanks perfectly filled all of the time, but you could fill them 35 times with a full reservoir. That extra water could have done something...maybe not extinguish the raging fire completely but perhaps dampen areas enough that it couldn't spread farther and do more damage. The dismissive attitude that it wouldn't have mattered anyway must really grate on those poor people who just lost their homes and businesses and wish that the fire department at least had the chance to try.