We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, February 22. 2019
Nude Beaches: Europe vs. the Caribbean
Are our readers ready? If not, why not?
Pompeo slams Huawei: US won't partner with countries that use its technology
Radically Transforming the Nation: Our Politicized Schools of Education
It’s Getting Done: 30-Foot Border Wall Project Begins In California
New migrant caravan forms as Mexican cities that border US keep swelling with asylum seekers
British Warmists Want To Ban All New Homes From Using Natural Gas
Media Hysteria: Climate Change ‘Heat Records’ Are a Huge Data Manipulation
Where to Go on Health Insurance?
Universal, Government-Funded Pre-K May Do More Harm Than Good
Federal prosecutors broke law in Jeffrey Epstein case, judge rules
GOP-ENDORSED CANDIDATE FOR PHILADELPHIA MAYOR SAYS ‘MENTAL ILLNESS’ HAS KEPT HER FROM WORKING FOR EIGHT YEARS
Viewers Starting To Doubt Objectivity Of Reporter With 'KAMALA 2020' Face Tattoo
Ocasio-Cortez rips media for reporting on her new luxury high-rise
Lifestyles of the rich and socialist: Bernie Sanders has 3 houses, makes millions
Good for him. It always confuses me, tho, how "public servants" get rich
Bernie Already Won. So Why Run Again? The Vermont independent has yanked Democrats so far to the left that his competitors are becoming mini-mes.
How President Trump Broke the Left
Forget About Jussie Smollett's Fake Noose Lynching, the NYT Has Just Gotten Word of Stunning Late-Breaking News: Emmett Till Has Been Lynched!
Jussie's lynching is Trump's fault
Good quote going around: "The demand for racism has outrun its supply."
Chicago Police Commissioner Calls Out Media, Stars and Politicians for Pushing Smollett Hoax
FBI Official Admits To Infiltrating Trump Campaign - Just Don't Call It Spying
WHO WILL FILL THE VACUUM LEFT BY ISIS? A very interesting phenomenon has taken place in the Idlib area of Syria: the presence of the Islamic State has almost completely disappeared.
GERMAN PRESIDENT LAUDS IRAN ON REVOLUTION THAT SEEKS ISRAEL'S DESTRUCTION
Germany has an excess of whorehouses
Tracked: Feb 24, 09:26
Tracked: Feb 24, 09:45
Tracked: Feb 24, 09:54
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
British warmists are slow, Dutch government has decided to not just ban all new buildings from using natural gas, but to ban the use of natural gas completely come 2030 (or even 2025) with no replacement offered, forcing expense refitting of every building in a country where 95% of heating and cooking is done using natural gas.
Estimated cost per single family home ranges from 25000 to over 60000 Euro on average, with no compensation being offered to home owners. Instead, energy prices are being cranked up dramatically, with the average home's utility bill estimated to go up by over 1500 Euro per year every year between now and 2030.
Saving the planet isn't cheap. But, in a hundred years when the temperatures are about as they are now (+/- 2C or so) they can congratulate themselves on being frontrunners.
Meanwhile, it snowed in Malibu California yesterday. https://www.sfgate.com/weather/article/snow-Malibu-California-Hollywood-13635213.php
Oh, NOOOOOOO. They're going to use UNnatural gas instead???
The HORROR!! The horror...
In the Jussie Smollett case, it turns out not to have been racist white Trump supporters who attacked him and sent him hate mail, it was black gay, liberal Democrat men( or man).
There are nude beaches pretty much everywhere and always have been.
Jeffery Epstein is the worlds biggest villain for having sex with teenage girls but Roman Polanski, Hugh Hefner and Bill Clinton are liberal heroes and did the same thing. I just can't keep up.
Rich and powerful guys (and gals) do whatever they feel like doing.
Even when I was a slip of a girl, there were nude beaches on the lake outside Austin. They were still there in the early 90s. My father, who lived nearby at that time, belonged to a thriving nudist club.
It's hilarious that Jussie Smollett had to outsource a racist, homophobic attack to 2 Nigerians! (Jobs Americans won't do.)
"Universal, Government-Funded Pre-K may do more harm than good"
The purpose is neither to do harm nor good. The purpose is to give free stuff in exchange for votes. The politicians don't really care if it harms children and families they only care about their political future and their power.
re nude beaches
Meh. Who wants to visit a beach surrounded by people who have no business shedding their clothes?
I am not attracted to beaches in general.
Maggies Farmers shall be reminded that public nudity is the fruit of physical obsession, the thing most next to godliness. I mean, why not?
Given the cleansing Sunday text, sometimes right next to. Next up: How your church can, in the 90 minutes allocated to it weekly, squeeze in some exposed privates, if you'll pardon the expression.
Used to go to the nude beach on Martha's Vineyard. My college girlfriend would go up there to work over summers with her friends and I'd spend a few weeks. We were all about 20-23 years old and none of us were eyesores at the time. I'm not even a beach person, but that was some good clean fun.
In this day and age, there is always the additional risk of being videoed/photographed and having your nekkid image posted on the internet. . .
Might be a problem for some.
Lifestyles of the rich and socialist: Bernie Sanders has 3 houses, makes millions
Bird Dog: Good for him. It always confuses me, tho, how "public servants" get rich
Sanders has made millions by writing best selling books (Our Revolution, Bernie Sanders Guide to Political Revolution), which is a perfectly legitimate source of income — even for a democratic socialist.
Yep, Bankfraud Bernie is one of them "good" socialists...
Yeah but it has a certain stench about it. He wants to take money from the middle class to do "good things" and his argument boils down to "nobody needs to have more than enough money to survive when so many don't have enough to survive". And there he is a millionaire with exorbitant perks and still with a straight face wants to tax the poor schlubs more because no one should have too much money.
It has the same stench that the priests have who are sexually exploiting young boys. Or that Maxine Watters has who lives in a mansion outside of her congressional district and claims to represent her constituents.
The ONLY thing Bernie can do to make himself clean and believable is to give away all of his money to the poor in Vermont and live his life as a pauper. He won't do that because he is dishonest about what he professes to believe and just like every socialist who ever lived what he really wants is control over others.
You can’t see the hypocrisy in someone running around deriding the very thing that he is - a very wealthy man, that was flat broke when he first ran for Congress, and gets a six figure income from the tax payers? His lucrative book deals came after his name went national, partly because of his support for the Sandinista’s. He makes 1700 percent more than the medium income of his constituents. Of course you don’t see the hypocrisy, why you’re a true believer. It doesn’t matter to you that all the politicians get rich under socialism, while all the rubes go hungry, with no toilet paper.
Don’t you fools usually take Fridays off?
Anon: He wants to take money from the middle class to do "good things"
Sanders proposed an increase in estate taxes on the rich, and an increase in income and payroll taxes on those with high incomes.
B. Hammer: You can’t see the hypocrisy in someone running around deriding the very thing that he is - a very wealthy man, that was flat broke when he first ran for Congress, and gets a six figure income from the tax payers?
Sanders would be subject to the higher payroll and income taxes.
Notably, you didn't answer B. Hammers question.
Why is that?
Hank_M: Notably, you didn't answer B. Hammers question.
We answered the question by showing why Sanders is not hypocritical by proposing taxes to which he would be subject.
No you didn't answer my question, you set up a strawman argument: "He proposed a tax." Big deal, wake me when it passes. If he truly believed in what he preaches, he would be giving all his money away, freely, back to the government for redistribution. Each according to his need, and all that bullshit.
You didn't answer my second question, how come you fools are trolling around here on Friday?
B. Hammer: No you didn't answer my question
Your question presupposes that Sanders is being hypocritical, but we argue he is not being hypocritical as he would be subject to the same policies he is advocating. Perhaps you could be more specific, such as by providing a quote or policy from Sanders you consider hypocritical.
B. Hammer: You didn't answer my second question, how come you fools are trolling around here on Friday?
We work on Jovial time. Hope that helps.
I think you need to read my entire response, to your strawman argument.
It's all over for Bernie . Maybe he'll actually run as an independent, instead of latching on to the democrat party, which he doesn't belong to.
B. Hammer: He makes 1700 percent more than the medium income of his constituents. Of course you don’t see the hypocrisy
hypocrisy, the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
Sanders advocates increased taxes on the rich to reduce inequality. Those taxes would also apply to Sanders, so he is not being hypocritical in this regard. Again, you might be more specific.
You're just being obtuse. Let us take this in baby steps: Communists, such as Bernie, or do you deny he advocates for communism?
B. Hammer: Let us take this in baby steps:
Often that's the best way, which allows for finding principle areas of agreement or disagreement.
B. Hammer: Communists, such as Bernie, or do you deny he advocates for communism?
Sanders is usually called a democratic socialist. What do you mean by communism? Where does he advocate for communism, as normally construed? Is he still a communist today?
It was a simple yes, or no question. You're just Zachingoff.
B. Hammer: It was a simple yes, or no question.
And we asked for clarification on the term "communism", which for whatever reason, you won't provide. Besides, if you know something, why wouldn't you generously share it with our readers, rather than playing coy?
I'm being coy, to 'your' readers. hahahahahaa. I'll let 'your' readers decide who is being coy.
How many times on this blog have you commented on the meaning of communism, socialism? I'll let 'your' readers discover that for themselves.
Bernie has advocated for years for communism . For this discussion let's go with this: an equal distribution of wealth by the state no matter how hard or little you work because the "means of production" are publicly owned. The primary goal of communism is to prevent the dark negative side effects of capitalism – income inequality.
Earlier, I was very specific on why this makes Bernie a hypocrite: "If he truly believed in what he preaches, he would be giving all his money away, freely, back to the government for redistribution." Simply advocating for a policy, does not get you to point B. He believes in income inequality, because he is a multimillionaire. Talk the talk, walk the walk!
Did you have to run upstairs and ask your mom for help? Or are you going to wait until midnight, like you usually do, and post some more gibberish?
I'll check back in the morning.
You know what communism is, Lee.
You're hoping B. Hammer offers up something you can argue about instead of answering his question.
We know who's being coy and it isn't B. Hammer.
Borg bot requires further programming.
B. Hammer: How many times on this blog have you commented on the meaning of communism, socialism?
Many times, but for some reason the standard definitions have been contentious on this blog.
B. Hammer: For this discussion let's go with this: an equal distribution of wealth by the state no matter how hard or little you work because the "means of production" are publicly owned.
Then, per the standard definition, Sanders is a democratic socialist, not a communist.
“To me, socialism doesn’t mean state ownership of everything, by any means, it means creating a nation, and a world, in which all human beings have a decent standard of living.” — Bernie Sanders
Still not answering my question. More Zachingoff. Playing word games. Just like Bernie. He’s still a hypocrite, under the charge that I have laid out. You have not refuted any of that.
The State no longer needs to out right own things, when they can regulate and impose fines while making it impossible to conduct business; unless the way you conduct business meets strict government approval. Two pees in the same pod. You can define it anyway you want, play word games until the world runs out of ink. However you define it, it’s not liberty and it will never work. Politicians, like Bernie, get rich, while the rest of the chattel live like poppers, starving to death after running out of toilet paper.
B. Hammer: He’s still a hypocrite, under the charge that I have laid out.
BH: You can’t see the hypocrisy in someone running around deriding the very thing that he is - a very wealthy man, that was flat broke when he first ran for Congress, and gets a six figure income from the tax payers?
No. It's not hypocritical as long as the policies he proposes also apply to himself.
BH: If he truly believed in what he preaches, he would be giving all his money away, freely, back to the government for redistribution. Each according to his need, and all that bullshit.
Sanders does not advocate taking 'all the money' for redistribution.
BH: Communists, such as Bernie, or do you deny he advocates for communism?
Sanders is a democratic socialist, and explicitly rejects "state ownership of everything".
B. Hammer: The State no longer needs to out right own things, when they can regulate and impose fines while making it impossible to conduct business; unless the way you conduct business meets strict government approval.
Next thing you know, they'll be telling you when to stop and when to go. Of course, in a democratic society, it's the people making these decisions through their representatives.
B. Hammer: You can define it anyway you want, play word games until the world runs out of ink.
Ah, so you are using re-definitions of the terms which we had previously agreed upon.
B. Hammer: However you define it, it’s not liberty and it will never work.
It is certainly possible for government to become too large. Democratic institutions act as a check, however. When Sweden's social programs threatened to swallow their economy, they voted to rein in government intervention in the economy.
All modern advanced economies are mixed economies, and have strong social safety nets, as well as robust markets. Where to draw the line is always a point of contention, but that doesn't make people on the left communists anymore than it makes people on the right fascists.
So glad Bernie doesn’t advocate taking all the money. Gee how nice of hm. Do you know how much money he intends to confiscate for redistribution? Guess it would be okay to be a multimillionaire, in Bernies America? That way, Bernie wouldn’t be a hypocrite. You would do yourself a favor by reading up on all these lefties. They always promise wonderful utopia. The results are always the same; misery for the very people they promise to help.
I’ll let Bernie tell you how much he admired the communist Castro, “But I remember, for some reason or another, being very excited when Fidel Castro made the revolution in Cuba — I was a kid and I remember reading that — and it just seemed right and appropriate that poor people were rising up against rather ugly rich people,” Is Bernie rich? Yes, and he is a hypocrite and a liar.
B. Hammer: So glad Bernie doesn’t advocate taking all the money.
So glad we are in agreement on that point.
B. Hammer: Do you know how much money he intends to confiscate for redistribution?
Sanders has proposed an increase in the estate tax, currently 40% on estates with a $11.4 million exemption, to a marginal system with a $3.5 million exemption:
$3.5 million, 45%
$10 million, 50%
$50 million, 55%
$1000 million, 70%
So your effective rate on $3 million would be 0%, and on $10 million, it would be 29%.
B. Hammer: They always promise wonderful utopia. The results are always the same; misery for the very people they promise to help.
Your original claims were that Sanders was a hypocrite and a communist. You have not been able to support either claim.
By the way, we do not support Sanders on taxes. A lower rate with fewer loopholes is fairer (in that the same size estates will pay a consistent amount), more likely to result in higher revenues to the government, and less likely to result in capital flight.
Works out pretty well for Ol' Bankfraud Bernie's beneficiaries.
Estate taxes are theft pure and simple at any level.
The reason article makes a good point about Bernie's success. While Republicans have been licking their chops speculating that victories will be easier if the Democrats move too far left, I think that is short-sighted and is not a good sign. Democrats do not adopt their positions as much for intellectual reasons as for social and psychological ones. They don't want to be one of those evil, cruel, miserly, and unfashionable conservatives, and will adopt whatever views their opponents profess. I exaggerate, but am not kidding about this. The Democrats have long been impractical and corrupt. Moving to insane and corrupt is not a plus.
Agreed. We talk sometimes as though the more unhinged sort of politician were coming from a place of true belief. I'd say it's more like Hollywood or a carnival huckster: give 'em what they want. Not as in "give them policies that will produce what they really want," but "give them something with the emotional appeal they seem ready to move off the couch for." It's the electoral equivalent of clickbait.
I believe AVI is right.
Time and again we have seen the dems take unpopular positions, and after a time those positions eventually become part of the law and/or culture.
AVI has good reason to be concerned as should we all.
Assistant Village Idiot: Democrats do not adopt their positions as much for intellectual reasons as for social and psychological ones.
Sort of. People seeking a party nomination needs to win within their party. So, with the current party polarization, Democrats need to appeal to the left, while Republicans need to appeal to the right. The problem they face is that if they move too far to the extreme, they may not be able to compete in the general election. However, when there are many candidates, such as the Republicans in 2016 or Democrats in 2020, there is even greater pressure to move to the extreme in order to stand out in the field.
Assistant Village Idiot: Democrats do not adopt their positions as much for intellectual reasons as for social and psychological ones.
Republicans do not adopt their positions as much for intellectual reasons as for social and psychological ones.
Texan99: Not as in "give them policies that will produce what they really want," but "give them something with the emotional appeal they seem ready to move off the couch for." It's the electoral equivalent of clickbait.
There's always that dynamic, e.g. "Build a wall, and Mexico will pay for it", but the dynamic is exaggerated when there are a large number of candidates within a party.
I would say that the conservative reasoning downfall is not in the direction of social or psychological appeals as emotional ones. We are suckers for symbols, and music, and nostalgia and these do sometimes overwhelm logic. But conservatives delight in being on the wrong side of things socially. I don't think any of us gets the option of being 100% logical, whatever we tell ourselves. I'm comfortable with erring on the side that I do, particularly since Jonathan Haidt's Moral Reasoning research has made it even clearer.
I admit I am using these terms without precise definition, but I think people can get my drift. There is overlap among the categories, but I think they hold up.
Assistant Village Idiot: But conservatives delight in being on the wrong side of things socially.
That would be contrary to most studies, which show conservatives as more likely to be conformist, as is consistent with conservative philosophy adhering as it does to existing traditions and social mores.
"Germany has an excess of whorehouses." is quite a revelation and food for thought.
In other surprising news, San Antonio has an excess of Mexican restaurants.
How President Trump Broke the Left
And the Right.
they laughed at Donald Trump the candidate.
"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." — Carl Sagan
The criminal cartel that is the Clinton machine ...
There is no proof of a "criminal cartel that is the Clinton machine".
... hired a former British intelligence officer—who hated Donald Trump the man—to generate a “dossier” of outlandish and false opposition research ...
The Steele dossier was never used by the Clinton campaign, and was considered raw intelligence. Nevertheless, the broad outlines of the dossier have been verified, including that Russia was working to interfere in the 2016 election, and was leaking stolen emails to damage the Clinton campaign.
... that was used by Barack Obama’s thoroughly corrupt Justice Department and FBI to gain under bogus pretenses a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance warrant to spy on her opponent’s campaign.
The Russia investigation started with a Trump advisor bragging about the Russians having emails damaging to Clinton. If the Trump campaign was being infiltrated by a hostile foreign power, the FBI would have been derelict not to follow up on the allegations in the Steele dossier. Trump was warned about possible infiltration.
Rosenstein and McCabe had never been elected to any public office, let alone the cabinet of the United States.
Rosenstein was nominated by Trump, and overwhelmingly confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
Yet by McCabe’s own admission, they plotted to use the 25th Amendment to our Constitution to remove the duly elected president—an amendment that was designed for the incumbent president’s cabinet to employ in the dire scenario that their superior was incapacitated and unable to perform his duties as commander-in-chief.
Only the Vice President can initiate action under the Twenty-fifth Amendment. Discussing the process, then discarding it as not suitable, is not a coup under any reasonable interpretation.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) went on record saying she’d only give the president $1 for the wall. Then, after a government shutdown and three weeks of negotiations, the president was finally offered $1.375 billion by the Democrats.
The $1.375 billion is not for a wall. Trump could have had $25 billion for his wall if he had accepted the deal offered by Democrats last year, which involved a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients. He talked himself into $0 for the wall, $1.375 billion if you generously call a fence a wall.
"How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg? Four. Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg." — Abraham Lincoln
So after requesting $5.7 billion to build the wall, and being refused and ridiculed, President Trump apparently walks away with $8 billion to keep his MAGA promise to America.
Full funds likely to be unavailable from the sources president has identified
"There is no proof of a "criminal cartel that is the Clinton machine". "
LOL There is so much proof that the entire FBI and DOJ had to go rogue in full coverup mode to keep her crimes under wraps. So much proof that her servers and smart phones had to be bleach bit'ed and destroyed to destroy the evidence. There is more than enough proof. What is lacking is a free and honest press to report on it, a honest FBI to investigate it and an honest DOJ to prosecute it.
Anon: So much proof that her servers and smart phones had to be bleach bit'ed and destroyed to destroy the evidence.
Ah, so you are referring to non-existent evidence. In fact, many of the emails were recovered. None of them pointed to a criminal cartel or whatever.
I am sure that if I was Secretary of State and set up a foundation and rewarded donors with fasttrack access to my department, then wiped my illegal server it wouldn't lead to any allegations of impropriety. Especially if my spouse met with the person who was in charge of the investigation right before the charges were dropped.
You're right, Zach. There is NO evidence at all of that.
Dangerous Dean: [i]I am sure that if I was Secretary of State and set up a foundation and rewarded donors with fasttrack access to my department, then wiped my illegal server it wouldn't lead to any allegations of impropriety. [/]
There were allegations of impropriety by the director of the FBI. However, the claim was a Clinton criminal cartel.
And then there's the Haiti thing, Uranium 1, obstuction, destruction of evidence, ...
Every comment y'all just posted is either misleading, a half-truth or an outright lie.
The kiddiez are the "Snopes" of Maggie's Farm.
No credibility whatsover.
Nude Beaches- Where mostly very old hippies with horrific bodies let you see waaaaay too much. Or unattractive exhibitionists rut in plain view. No thank you. During my sailing years, I would look at crowded beaches and thank God I was on my boat and not amongst the sweating masses.
It’s Getting Done: 30-Foot Border Wall Project Begins In California
That's funny. It's a fence, not a wall, to replace existing fencing, and the video Trump posted is old.
Post meaningless unconvincing twitter feed as"proof" or something.
Data manipulation tells me two things: (1) the researcher and perhaps his cronies are so untrustworthy I can afford to ignore everything they say, and (2) it's not worth the time to dig into their theory, because if it had any predictive power, they wouldn't have to fudge the data to boost its persuasiveness.
It's a special case for a more general rule: anyone identified as a liar may as well be mute. The power of speech is too great a human gift to be squandered by acting in a way that will close everyone's ears to you.
Texan99: Data manipulation tells me two things ...
Then you should ignore the article and the author as the author conflates U.S. temperature with the global temperature anomaly, and local extremes with the global temperature anomaly.
The data clearly shows that the Earth's surface, troposphere, and oceans are warming, while the stratosphere cools.
More outdated overused meaningless graphs.
Rinse, lather, repeat...
The Smollet tale is providing a nice little absurd "Heads-I-Win, Tails-You-Lose" moment for Trump haters, but I predict the jump-the-shark rubicon will only come when someone suggests that Jussie was justly motivated by concerns for fair payment, and none of this would have happened if we had only just granted reparations.
Turns outs Smollett is Kamal Harris" nephew! This just gets better and better! His producers have written him out of the show as well. Rough days ahead for him and his supporters.
Chgo's PD is getting hot! R. Kelly turned himself in Friday morning on new charges of sex with underage girls. This time is not getting bail as they fear he will leave the country. Both he and Smollett have pulled resources.
Jussie's hoax required 26 LEOs , resulting in increased crime such as burglaries, robberies, bank hold-ups, assaults, car-jackings, etc. in that three week period between his styled attack and his exposure as the perp. Robert Kelly had multiple complaints around the 24/7/365 activity at his "studio" on the near west side, which required constant babysitting by the police as he and his crew continued to occupy the space off ours despite zoning restrictions.
Apparently, the law simply doesn't apply to these VIPs.
"Are our readers ready? If not, why not?"
I have bits that I do not want to experience sunburned. And I do not want to expose to the cold winds coming off upwelling water as one experiences on the west coasts of northern continents.
Germany: according to the documentary linked in the prostitution story, 90% of the prostitutes in the country have been forced into that line of work or abused until prostitution seemed like the way to make a living.
Men often want sex enough to pay for it. I don't think that will ever change. But what I don't understand is how a man could force or manipulate a woman into being a prostitute. I can't find words for how cowardly that is.
Just goes to show that making an act legal doesn't make it right.
Does anyone here have the dimensions of this bollard wall? How wide are the bollards? How wide are the slots in between? Is there electrification? How deep is the foundation? Does anyone have "design specs"?
Bollard spacing should never be wider than 5 feet. In order to protect against vehicle traffic, bollards need to be appropriately spaced. A distance of 5 feet should provide enough protection to cover the minimum width of a car.Feb 12, 2015
Bollard Placement Standards | Bollard Spacing | TrafficGuard
https://www.trafficguard.net › blog › pla...
Bollards come in a variety of sizes, in order to accommodate being used in different areas and for different purposes. Heights for bollards typically range from 30″ to 48″ tall, with the average height of them being 36″ or three feet tall.
Information About Traffic Safety Devices & Steel Pipe Bollards
https://www.trafficguard.net › faq
Thank you Zachingoff. I was referring to the "wall" that is not solid but rather built out of metal polls like bollards.
Trump: "A design of our Steel Slat Barrier which is totally effective while at the same time beautiful!"
Based on the picture from the official Trump twitter feed:
• The slats are about 10 inches wide.
• The gaps are nine inches.
• The fence is 341 inches tall — or about 28.4 feet — with 13-inch spikes on top.
People can fit through a nine inch gap.
Dept. of Homeland Security test
The prototype seems to have different dimensions, though there were some problems in testing.
Actual adult real people human persons can't much fit through a 9" gap, Clownbot, although their kids could. Do illegal "climate refugees" generally illegally shove their illegal kids through barriers illegally? Because that would be a thing, wouldn't it.
Or: Do you generally scale your exact engineering from simple depictions? Apparently the jeenyus leftists defecating in potus's thread do, jeenyuses that they are. Are leftists generally jeenyuses? How about clownbots?
And yeah, "the prototype seems to have different dimensions", which is because people aren't as stupid as you probably assume, or did you think somebody thought to erect a border barrier with slats eighteen inches apart to keep out Mexican water buffalo and aircraft carriers?
And of course you can take a side grinder to 1/4" mild steel box tube with concrete centers and go through it. You'll need one - or many - plus a mighty long extension cord to power it, or a mighty long muffler to silence it if it's a gas machine. You'll also need about 20 minutes per cut and a box of blades. There's a nice gig for enterprising capitalists on the other side of the thing.
You ever cut steel with a circular carborundum blade, Clownbot? Did you expect the barrier to be made from titanium? Stainless steel? You even notice the surface oxidation? Hard to make stainless do that although with this climate who knows.
Well, did you expect a thousand mile tungsten barrier? Keep scribbling and remove all doubt.