Here's the precise clip:
Meanwhile, in Congress (NYT):
House and Senate negotiators on Monday night agreed in principle to provide $1.375 billion for fencing and other physical barriers at the Mexican border, part of a broader agreement that would stave off another partial government shutdown without funding President Trump’s wall.Bollard fencing? Does that mean those concrete and steel posts that stop vehicles (but not pedestrians)? Wikipedia:
The agreement would allow for 55 miles of new bollard fencing, with some restrictions on location based on community and environmental concerns, according to two congressional aides, who requested anonymity to disclose details of the private negotiations. That is a fraction of the more than 200 miles of steel-and-concrete wall that Mr. Trump demanded — and 10 miles less than negotiators agreed on last summer, before Democrats took control of the House.
A bollard is a sturdy, short, vertical post. The term originally referred to a post on a ship or quay used principally for mooring boats, but is now also used to refer to posts installed to control road traffic and posts designed to prevent ram raiding and car ramming attacks.I'm sure you can picture bollards. I just wanted to show you these bollards from Geelong (in Australia):
Posts
81 comments:
Take the $, then declare a border emergency.
Is there anything the Republicans is Congress won't roll over and play dead for? Do they have a pathological need to cave in to Progressive pressure and abandon the desires of their voters? They'll give a pittance for border insecurity (sic), as long as it doesn't deter anyone from actually crossing the border. I pray PDT turns this deal down.
https://heavy.com/news/2019/02/bollard-style-border-wall-fence-trump/
Real fence
Yes, 55 is a fraction of 200. About 25%!
That's a very significant move toward the goal. NYT, of course, tries to minimize the success.
Post title is misleading--intentionally, I believe. It makes Inga think that Trump confessed to the Russian bullshit and other crap that Lefties pull out of their asses. CNN/WaPo/NYT would be proud of you.
If it takes 25% at a time, then it's a start to eventually reach 100%. But, why stop there...
Bollard is also the cigarette brand from a now-forbidden skit in "Beyond the Fringe."
True hector I mean beto would cute the trojan horse
Here is an example of bollard fencing:
https://www.nogalesinternational.com/news/bollard-border-fence-draws-good-reviews-on-first-anniversary/article_3c0e21c6-e884-11e1-aedc-001a4bcf887a.html
I mean beto
You mean Pancho Vanilla?
Only part of the fence?
From Urban Dictionary:
"Just the tip"
In the dynamics of heterosexual relations human males are often confronted by human females reluctant to engage in coitus. In such situations a human male may initiate a game called "Just the tip", which represents a suggested compromise in the age old battle of the sexes. In a typical game of "Just the tip" it will be verbally agreed that the male
may penetrate his partner's vagina, but with stipulation that his may only insert the glans or "tip" of his penis.
The female payoff is that she may avoid both physical pain and/or social ostracism, while the male enjoys limited coitus. In many cases, it is documented that upon insertion a formally reluctant female may become to open to allowing the male other sexual largesse; hence the games popularity.
I am Laslo.
Yes but I was rolling with a trojan war motif, although guess star on game of thrones would work.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-border-wall-construction-photos-new-mexico-2018-4
But those friendly figures Althouse shows seem less "immoral". They could eventually be modified into a sort of Pez dispenser for drivers licenses, maybe Social Security cards and convincing backstories by which to request asylum.
But ok..a lesser $$ amount than requested will still make that great arbiter of morality, Queen Pelosi, unable to sleep.
But yes, as Mr. Majestyk suggests, the ultimate "immorality" will be if Trump embraces the power of "and" with state of emergency/drug corridor military approach.
Is everything a put up job:
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/321532/?fbclid=IwAR2Nn4UOlyTxjh915WyNxbStIBTIu4xUSHlqqIHnyoBX-Su2LtYAS9kfFn4
Laslo, that's probably where that "Give an inch, they take a mile" phrase originated.
Trump could keep the government shut down for the rest of his term and he still wouldn't get Pelosi to fund the wall. After years of bullying all his rivals and opponents into submission, he finally found someone who wouldn't cave.
The Dems have decided to say no right through the November 2020 elections. If a Dem wins the Presidency, the wall will be a dead issue.
So, sinz52, the Dems lied, as usual, when they said they'd negotiate if the government was reopened. Of course, they'll claim that "negotiate" means stonewall until the Dems get what they want. Words mean what we want them to mean, right?
sinz52 said...
If a Dem wins the Presidency, the wall will be a dead issue.
And, what if Trump wins, and wins bigly. What do you think will happen then?
Such a dealmaker. The great dealmaker wasn't even in the room. And now, his dealmaking skills have painted him into such a corner, that absolutely every option open to him (Shutdown #2; National Emergency; Sign a bill out of Conference) will look bad. They mostly are all bad, including the Conference bill.
The proof of how bad this all is, is watching Fox News and seeing how they are obsessed with Congresswomen Tlaib, Ocasio-Cortez, and now Omar. Three inconsequential backbenchers, versus the President's signature domestic issue.
All the Trump supporters have been saying ever since the last end of the shutdown, "It's not over! Just wait and see what a deal PDJT can get!" Haha. I'm waiting.
Seeing as one of Cortez 'brain trust' rhiann Wright was el sayed advisor and she In turn is pushing whitmer to go full green, I'll be happy when the brownouts start in wherever you live.
During the Flight 93 election in 2016, Chuck wanted to remain in his seat, because he's such a conservative. Republicans cave, and Chuck applauds. Caving is his forte. Standing for something, and expecting your representatives in Congress to support you, that's Trump's fault, because he elected those people, right? You get the blame, Chuck. You're a lifelong Republican, correct? You supported the Republican cowards in Congress who cave to every progressive whim. It's your shutdown, if Trump refuses to play along, which I hope he does.
You're in the wrong place, Chuck, you'd better leave.
Actually the conference committee was doomed from the outset because it had no birder state representation, and the likes of dick durbin.
Practically speaking, how many miles of “new bollard fencing” could go up between now and the end of the fiscal year in October anyway?
Plus it doesn’t mention if additional money is allocated to the bolstering/replacement of old barriers (a face saving move for Dems?)
Either way Trump would be on surer ground reprogramming DoD or other appropriation for the repair of existing barriers.
Chuck,
Many Republicans (and Dems) suggested Trump stay out of it so they could work their magic.
Witness the magic.
If only we had steel spine Kasich to negotiate.
I mean, his Dad was a mailman, for God's sake.
Chuck said...
"I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
3/4/16, 4:46 PM
Anyways back to the bowman tribute to pynchon, he goes back to Mexico city where Howard hunt meets Buckley for the first time, others hanging around there is Carl djerassi the inventor of the pill. And future novelist William Burroughs made also there.
Nancy 'lord of the rat' Alessandri who seems determined to make San Francisco into Genoa, (the original venue for the plague)
Trump exposed the Democrats as the rats they are.
Do you think that isn't worth anything come future elections? The Media can't hide the decline in Pelosi's approval ratings.
Build the Wall!, er, Partially Extend the Barrier!
I jest, of course. Any steps to thwart the Open Borders crowd is a step in the right direction.
Keeping with the metaphor. Of course the late bowman is much in the mailer Ginsburg stream of antiAmericans and as such he indulges in much category error.
Trump's first point was best- the rich (mostly Dems, sadly not all) have walls and armed guards, but those are also the ones who want to remove the 2nd Amendment for regular people.
Clarity is a very important value in politics. While the Republicans had both houses, nothing passed to build the wall. I'm sure Trump was being told to not rock the boat.
As soon as the Dems got control of the House, Trump forced a wall battle. He could have just signed the first resolution. The issue would have just disappeared.
Now we have clarity. The Dems position is the wall is immoral and we need to abolish ICE.
I believe the next election is going to be open borders vs border enforcement. Then we will have clarity.
In the past month the Chuckpublicans have threatened Trump with impeachment by showing him that they can put together a coalition in the Senate to keep him from withdrawing troops in Syria and Afghanistan. They are also fucking him on a wall victory, telling Democrats to stay their course in private. They also threatened him about using emergency powers for the wall.
As with my first link there is a literal wall around el Paso, that's how o'Rourke's father in law keeps the value of his property
A far cry from 6 billion.
“In the past month the Chuckpublicans have threatened Trump with impeachment by showing him that they can put together a coalition in the Senate to keep him from withdrawing troops in Syria and Afghanistan. They are also fucking him on a wall victory, telling Democrats to stay their course in private. They also threatened him about using emergency powers for the wall.”
Looks like they found their testicles.
Looks like they found their testicles.
They were in the Left's mouth all along.
Shut it down.
If you go read the article about Laura Loomer trespassing on one of Pelosi’s houses, the AP article used the word barrier, because they did not want to use the word wall.
Another article used the term low wall.
You're in the wrong place, Chuck, you'd better leave.
Maybe I too am in the wrong place and better leave.
https://newrepublic.com/article/153036/maria-butina-profile-wasnt-russian-spy?fbclid=IwAR2e9ZK9KoFoBr8_ZGyQtXQchfOEQ2eTv1HMdMYoTx8ja5hM-s7JVEAuCb8
Meade @8:21 wins the thread.
Leatherface mind-fart Nancy said ZERO.
I thought ZERO?
Never mind the bollards -- here's the Chuck epistles.
“I thought ZERO?”
Nancy said zero for a WALL. this won’t be a wall, a big beautiful wall, “we should call it the Trump Wall!”
Now we have clarity. The Dems position is the wall is immoral and we need to abolish ICE.
Not only that, but certain peoples -- only certain peoples -- have an inherent right of northward expansion.
Wow, what a great compromise. 1.375 Billion for the wall when he asked for 5-6.
In the federal government budget that’s a rounding error. It’s all gamesmanship. Is no one in a Washington (except Trump) willing to do what’s right for the country ?
JHC, the Dems are perfectly willing to spend 10 times that amount eradicating farting cows.
Fuckers.
Ignorance is Bliss,
Thanks for the photo of the bollard fencing. Not what I'd think of when I think of "bollards". I think of bollards as more standalone. Stores have bollards, heavy posts, 3-4' apart, in front of the entrance to stop store crashing vehicles.
I would call the bollards in the pic more of a fence, or slats. I could even call it a wall, though that feels a bit off to me.
For those who have not seen the pic, it is slats, closely spaced, fairly heavy and impenetrable to anything much larger than a cat.
In any event, if calling it bollards gets them accepted, that is fine with me. Hell call them Obamafence if you like. Just get them built.
John Henry
This is a godawful deal. Not only does it only provide for a small amount of the wall, it reduces the current number of available ICE beds, which will more than offset any benefit from a physical barrier. Trump has been a mess on immigration however his defenders want to spin it.
47 million people. 76%. CBS poll: 76% approval. CNN poll: 76% approval. Astonishing. Unprecedented. Devastating.
New ballgame folks.
Trump should announce he is willing to compromise. Specifically, he should say that he will willing to accept only 20% of what Obama gave Iran.
"Trump has been a mess on immigration however his defenders want to spin it."
Give Trump a call. I'm sure he'd be happy to let you try.
@Bob Boyd:
Give Trump a call. I'm sure he'd be happy to let you try.
Good idea. I can give him a lot of people's names that don't end in Kushner. Coulter, Ingraham, Kaus, Krikorian, Vaughn. They'd all be much better than what we've had hitherto. But luckily Trump can always count on sycophants who will lick his ass and beg for seconds.
Were I Trump I would tear down the fucking wall in Tijuana so Inga and Chuck can see immoral right up close.
@Bobb:
Specifically, he should say that he will willing to accept only 20% of what Obama gave Iran.
Obama did not give that to Iran. That was Iranian money that was frozen in foreign bank accounts.
Pull the troops out of Afghanistan and put them on the southern border.
Commandeer the national guard of the border states and put them in the border.
Stack the border with military personnel.
Then go into San Francisco and start deporting Oekosis dreamers. The ones who clean her pool.
Then fire McConnell’s wife and open investigations into his father in laws busniess.
That was Iranian money that was frozen in foreign bank accounts
Yes. Awaiting lawsuits that were held up by the US government. People wanted recompense for Iranian wrongs--including expropriation of assets. Their right under the law.
@ J. Farmer
You're a smart guy, Farmer. There's no need for that.
Blogger Darrell said...
I mean beto
You mean Pancho Vanilla?
Nailed him!
Fire Son In Law
mccullough: magical thinking is cute if you are a pre-teen girl mooning over rainbows and unicorns. The son in law is the family bag man. if Jared gets the axe, then Trump goes broke for realz.
Howard,
You spend a lot of time thinking about pre-teen girls?
yeah, they are called grandkids.
@Bob Boyd:
You're a smart guy, Farmer. There's no need for that.
Didn't mean to include you among the ass-licking sychophants. Truth is, I don't know about your point of view to make that judgment. A bit of a rhetorical flourish. That said, I do think it is useful to hold Trump's feet to the flames, especially on what I consider the single most important issue in the country. It does no good for supporters of Trump to bend over backwards to defend or make excuses for his failures.
alanc709: Is there anything the Republicans is Congress won't roll over and play dead for? Do they have a pathological need to cave in to Progressive pressure and abandon the desires of their voters?
It's perfectly rational; there's nothing "pathological" about it. Republicans in Congress don't work for their voters, so why on earth would you expect them to care what their voters want?
Their employers are essentially the same class of people the Dems in Congress work for. The Republicans need to get into Congress, and stay there for a requisite period, in order to deliver the goods for their employers (until such time that they can move on to other well-remunerated private sector positions provided by their employers). This necessitates periodically larping as "conservatives" in order to flim-flam the voters who aren't keen on the Dems' stated policy preferences. Seems to work like a charm, most of the time.
Sociopathological, yes, in the sense that whoring for the donors requires implementing policies that are economically and socially destructive for the nation in any time-frame exceeding the employee's projected employment and retirement needs.
@Darrell:
Yes. Awaiting lawsuits that were held up by the US government. People wanted recompense for Iranian wrongs--including expropriation of assets. Their right under the law.
It was not "awaiting lawsuits." The money was frozen because of UN sanctions. None of this money was held in US bank accounts, and no US litigant would have the ability to seize those funds. Also, most private claims against Iran were settled via the US-Iran Claims Tribunal, which rewarded about $2.5 billion to US nationals.
Michael said...
Were I Trump I would tear down the fucking wall in Tijuana so Inga and Chuck can see immoral right up close.
I won't speak for Inga (but my guess is that on this, I will do a good enough job)...
You have mischaracterized me, and you've done it in a wholly false way.
For my part, I don't want any walls torn down. I think that there are many areas along our southern border that could use some new sections of wall, and other areas where we could build better walls, and other areas where no walls are needed. When the issue wasn't wrapped up in "Trump," Congress and Presidents of both parties have supported funding for incremental sections of wall and other border security measures.
What I opposed when it came to "walls," was Donald Trump's idiotic rhetoric. Telling his gullible base of supporters that he would "build a great wall," because he was such a great builder, and that he would get Mexico to pay for it.
Trump will never build "a great wall," and he will never get Mexico to pay for it. It was a stupid and even ridiculous idea; intended to be a sales pitch to his ignorant, fearful, myopic base.
Trump has created this Wall issue as a government-stopping flash point. Precisely because Trump did that, the Democrats will oppose it. And it they don't oppose it, it will be because the Democrats will feel that they can use compromise to their advantage to diminish Trump.
It all goes back to Trump's primary-campaign promising.
J.Farmer: It does no good for supporters of Trump to bend over backwards to defend or make excuses for his failures.
I agree, but then again I'm not sure what Trump can accomplish when the hand of every man (woman and gender-fluid entity) in the existing political structure is against any kind of meaningful immigration restriction. (For that matter, I don't think Trump himself is particularly sound on legal immigration policy, either, even if his stated preferences are some improvement on the status quo.)
"That said, I do think it is useful to hold Trump's feet to the flames, especially on what I consider the single most important issue in the country."
Agree 100%. I don't feel like I'm making excuses to recognize how many forces are arrayed against Trump on immigration and what a heavy lift this turned out to be. The only people who are going to help Trump on this are the voters, if they will. Congressional Republicans are worthless, apparently.
People need to put pressure on Congress. Call, email, etc. Trump's the only game in town when it comes to immigration. I'm not ready to call him a failure him just yet.
Chuck, self-deport.
Chuck, self-deport.
I will self-deport with him.
Using reverse psychology to fatten the goose that lays the golden eggs... momma want;s a new house!
Chuck is unlikely to self deport so long as he keeps finding cheap legal day labor at his local Althome Depot.
Trump will never build "a great wall," and he will never get Mexico to pay for it. It was a stupid and even ridiculous idea; intended to be a sales pitch to his ignorant, fearful, myopic base.
El Chapo convicted on all counts. Guess who has control of his $Billions? Looks like President Trump found his funding.
More on the wall deal. Pelosi stated she might give $1.00 toward barriers. She held fast and sacrificed 800,000 govt employees comfort for her dick measuring contest with President Trump. Today she gives a lot more than $1.00. She could have negotiated exactly this deal before Christmas.
This is another case of leftists talking a good story to suck up to voters, but their actions prove again, that form beats function every time.
Wait a minute iowan2, shouldn’t the El Chapo billions go towards resettling Central Americans in the US? That’s what Nancy wants.
Here's the "and":
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realDonaldTrump
34m34 minutes ago
....Will be getting almost $23 BILLION for Border Security. Regardless of Wall money, it is being built as we speak!
4,922 replies 5,124 retweets 20,190 likes
Show this thread
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realDonaldTrump
34m34 minutes ago
Was just presented the concept and parameters of the Border Security Deal by hard working Senator Richard Shelby. Looking over all aspects knowing that this will be hooked up with lots of money from other sources....
Bollard is the polite term. When the item was first introduced to my lexicon, the old seiner skipper called it a "niggerhead".
I seem to have missed the post where Chuck made himself PNG with our hosts. Seems to me Althouse and Meade have put up with much nastier.
No one owes me an explanation, of course, but it has puzzled me lately.
Why is Chuck still here?
THEOLDMAN
JPS said...
I seem to have missed the post where Chuck made himself PNG with our hosts. Seems to me Althouse and Meade have put up with much nastier.
No one owes me an explanation, of course, but it has puzzled me lately.
The short answer is, "It puzzeles me, too."
Althouse, quite rightly, doesn't want personal back-and-forths with commenters. I'd love that. Because I am Subject Number One of so many of the attacks. And I raised it directly with Althouse long ago, and pointed out her admonition (then removed) about how comments should not attack other commenters. Althouse has called such comments "clutter" and she says -- again rightly -- that it makes her comments pages more tedious, less interesting, and sometimes unreadable.
But she does not want to continually police the comments and take her valuable time to pick off offending posts and remove them. I don't blame her.
But clearly, I am not the aggressor in the personal-attack game here. I do challenge Althouse on some substantive points about politics and policy and (rarely) the law. But more often, I am in agreement with Althouse and nobody says that more regularly than I do.
I do think that it has become something of a running joke (?!) with Meade. What sort of joke is hard for me to say.
If there were rules for commenting here, and if they were enforced, I'd no doubt be very happy. But I just don't see that happening. I think it is far more nuanced. Althouse -- I presume -- wants a "community" of readers. A large, low-maintenance group of readers who support her blog and share interesting thoughts and don't cause any trouble. Whether there can be an "disagreement" in that is another matter. Truly, I think Althouse is devoted to free speech in ways that few others can imagine. She hasn't banned me; and it would be beyond weird if she did, insofar as I have been her most vocal commenter on better moderation of comments. Meade keeps doing his thing, and I can tell you that it began when I began to pointedly challenge Althouse on the way her other commenters were treating me, in comparison to what her commenting rules/instructions/suggestions state on her pages. I guess Meade didn't like that, but I don't even completely understand that, since Meade is a frequent utilizer of free speech rights on the internet. And good for him, for that.
So what did you like better; the short answer or the long one?
Post a Comment