-
vxbush
4/1/2024 6:05:19 AM
-
1
|
Stephen Green has a nice article comparing how long they estimate it will take to replace the Fracis Scott Key bridge against other suitably big (and bigger) projects from earlier this century. Ten years seems like an insanely long time to build a bridge from scratch unless the goal is graft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-
vxbush
4/1/2024 6:18:23 AM
-
6
|
I wish this was just an April Fools' joke: San Francisco Creates a New Planter Permit So having tents blocking access to doors and taking up most of the sidewalks is okay with the city, but businesses installing planters that prevent squatters from placing those tents to free up sidewalk space is unacceptable and now you have to get a permit to set up a planter. Liberals are clearly brain dead.
|
|
-
vxbush
4/1/2024 6:25:27 AM
-
7
|
|
|
-
JCM
4/1/2024 7:26:59 AM
-
8
|
Reply to vxbush in 1: Daily traffic is 31,000 cars. They don't need a bigger one. The approach spans are mostly intact. the approach support columns are fine. They can use the same basic design, with some engineering improvements. They could improve the footings and add new dolphins. blocks to keep ships from coming that close again. Design a few months. While they are doing the footing a pier work they can start on modular construction of the bridge itself. 3 years max if they really wanted to do it.
|
|
|
-
vxbush
4/1/2024 7:40:11 AM
-
10
|
In #8 JCM said: 3 years max if they really wanted to do it. That's the problem, or at least one aspect of the problem. Replacing the bridge sounds like an insurmountable task if you are a DEI hire. Very few people these days know how to do things, because they aren't familiar with reality.
|
|
|
-
buzzsawmonkey
4/1/2024 12:09:08 PM
-
12
|
In #9 JCM said: A branch of the Dept. of Defense doesn't have money for .... DEFENSE! The "Department of Defense" has never won a war. The War Department, which it replaced following WWII, did---but a "defense department" is not in the business of victory. Rather, it is in the business of (temporarily) fending off immediate threats.
|
|
-
vxbush
4/1/2024 12:37:52 PM
-
13
|
In #12 buzzsawmonkey said: Rather, it is in the business of (temporarily) fending off immediate threats making everyone's pronouns visible and being inclusive. Corrected for the 21st century.
|
|
|
-
buzzsawmonkey
4/1/2024 2:00:30 PM
-
15
|
Reply to JCM in 14: And the Democrats' identification with the "dindu nuffins" is complete.
|
|
-
vxbush
4/1/2024 2:12:06 PM
-
16
|
In #15 buzzsawmonkey said: And the Democrats' identification with the "dindu nuffins" is complete. Aw, that's a blast from the past.
|
|
-
buzzsawmonkey
4/1/2024 2:35:18 PM
-
17
|
Reply to vxbush in 16: Anything discussing Biden's "Easter" proclamation is a "blessed by the pest."
|
|
|
-
Occasional Reader
4/1/2024 4:02:14 PM
-
19
|
In #14 JCM said: Biden says he 'didn't do that' when asked about Easter being 'Trans Visibility Day,' despite proclamation
I don't want to register to read the piece; did Biden literally claim that he did not make the proclamation?
|
|
-
JCM
4/1/2024 5:19:16 PM
-
20
|
Reply to Occasional Reader in 19:
President Biden said Monday that he "didn't do that" when asked about his official White House proclamation declaring March 31, the same day as Easter this year, as Transgender Day Of Visibility. In an exchange with reporters at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll, Biden declined responsibility for the proclamation when asked about House Speaker Mike Johnson's, R-La., criticism of the action. Over the weekend, Johnson wrote in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that the White House "betrayed the central tenet of Easter," adding that the proclamation was "outrageous and abhorrent." "He’s thoroughly uninformed," Biden remarked when asked about Johnson's comments. "I didn’t do that."
|
|
-
buzzsawmonkey
4/1/2024 5:33:36 PM
-
21
|
Reply to JCM in 20: In further news, Joseph Robbin' It Biden changed his name to Drew Lingboob.
|
|
-
Occasional Reader
4/1/2024 5:36:12 PM
-
22
|
Reply to JCM in 20:
Oh, well, then. Glad that's all cleared up, Joe!
|
|
-
Kosh's Shadow
4/1/2024 7:04:37 PM
-
23
|
Reply to JCM in 20: Puppident, not president
|
|
|
You must be logged in to comment.