[ER_in_OC,CA]

Thanks for all your responses opposing my position that using campaign ads with the fires as imagery would be a bad idea.

I'm curious if any of you could provide me some facts illustrating what portion of these fire areas have been substantially effected by clearing restrictions that are under Federal jurisdiction.

It's been my assumption that these fire areas are not predominately national forests.

If a majority of the burned region is directly under Federal control and or mandates for clearing, and there has been clear and decisive obstruction by the government, then I will agree more fully with the "culpability" argument.

I appreciate one of you linking a fact-sheet from the 2002 fires, but this isn't the 2002 fire.

I still believe that seeking to play the fire videos on campaign ads will turn off more voters than it will turn on. Most voters in CA aren't conservative firebrands, and trying to pin the fires on Boxer won't wash with the Dems and/or listless independents whose votes we need to defeat her.

[A CA Guy]

My understanding is enviornmentalist prevented the beetle ravaged trees from removal in Lake Arrowhead for starters.

They have to be held accountable.