It’s difficult to imagine how one man could say so many dumb things. This guy makes Dan Quayle seem like Isaac Newton. To be fair to Trump, he did actually identify a country with a lot of forest land, which surprises me. I’m surprised that he even knows the name of the country, although I’d be willing to wager he could not find it on a map.
No, they don’t rake the forests in Finland. It would be quite a task. They have approximately 5,000 trees for each person. I’m pretty sure that job would really cut into their sauna time.
But they should!
Just an ordinary day in the Finnish forest ~ Ihan normipäivä suomalaisessa metsässä #Trump #forest #firesafety #raking #forestry #Finland #Finnish #CaliforniaFire #RakingAmericaGreatAgain #rakingtheforest #Suomi #haravointi #metsäpalot #rakingleaves pic.twitter.com/YOKA3D6C2K
— Pyry Luminen (@pyryluminen) November 18, 2018
He had the entire cross country flight to remember the name of one town that has been constantly in the news for the last two weeks and he couldn’t pull it off. “Pleasure!?” … well he got the “p” right. His Finland comment is minor in comparison.
Governor Brown’s facial expression is priceless when Le Grand Orange calls the town “Pleasure” a second time.
Sonny Bush spent half his presidency “clearing brush” on his “ranch”. Maybe that’s where the Annoying Orange pulled this one out of. Still, Bush never had a forest fire. Take that, libtards!
Tell you what, if Trump likes Finland’s forestry policies, he should check out their ideas on health care.
There probably are things that California needs to do more of in the forests to deal with the increased fire threat caused by the droughts and by global warming: controlled burns and selective logging of trees, but I do find it amusing to read global warming deniers who think pretend they are experts in science (or have an understanding in economics) who say that dead underbrush needs to be removed by people. There may be some ability to do that in some forested areas near major population centers, but otherwise, the people who say this clearly have no understanding of the amount of dead underbrush in forests or just how labor intensive (and therefore expensive) such a task is.
Even the right wing Wall Street Journal published an article that laughed at the idea of people going in to forests and removing dead underbrush.