OT El Paso bristles at Trump's claim that wall made city safe

[CupWizier]

Says the guy who complains here frequently about his lack of service.



I don't think you can get anything over the air that is 4 times faster than fiber. Maybe 4 times faster than what you had before, I'd believe that.

barfo

Well, you have to consider marzy grew up with strings and tin cans to communicate.

 

[barfo]

Well, you have to consider marzy grew up with strings and tin cans to communicate.

Well, the prototypes, anyway. Which were rocks tied together with vines.

barfo

 

[Hoopguru]

Yeah. That was my point... lots of people have access to fiber now, and more will in the next few years.
Will every rural household ever have fiber? Maybe not - it would require something like the Rural Electrification Act since it isn't profitable to do it.
And I'm not sure we city dwellers will lobby for a Rural Fiber Act, given what dicks rural people have been ever since we paid for their electricity.

barfo

stay on your side of the tracks! jk

 

[Hoopguru]

Well sometimes people disagree and thats ok.

TBF..im glad you put it that way! It is OK!

 

[Mediocre Man]

So? It's what I meant to say. Now you understand.

I can't help but wonder how you'd react if someone used that line on you...

 

[Lanny]

Agree completely with the first paragraph. The second one is nonsense. I looked up congressional representatives for Texas and Arizona. Texas has 36 reps about 2/3 of whom are Republicans. First guy I googled about the wall, Louie Gohmert, is fully supportive of Trump on the wall. I picked a random Republican Arizona rep, Martha McSally, and she says, "It needs to be a bottom-up approach as far as what the agents need, what the sectors need," McSally said during a discussion on border security last year. "But it certainly includes the border wall, access roads, agents patrolling the border, technology and situational awareness, so they can detect and shut down the activity."

Let's start with Arizona rep, Martha McSally. She is not a Congressman. She is a Senator.
Now, let's look at Representative Louie Gohmert. His district does not border Mexico. https://gohmert.house.gov/district/interactivemap.htm

Here's what I said:
"Nobody in the House that has a constituency along the border wants a wall more than what we have now." Note the word House. Now note the expression "has a constituency along the border . . ."

 

[e_blazer]

Let's start with Arizona rep, Martha McSally. She is not a Congressman. She is a Senator.
Now, let's look at Representative Louie Gohmert. His district does not border Mexico. https://gohmert.house.gov/district/interactivemap.htm

Here's what I said:
"Nobody in the House that has a constituency along the border wants a wall more than what we have now." Note the word House. Now note the expression "has a constituency along the border . . ."

Note that I already noted all of this above. So eight Democrats are toeing the party line and one Republican wants a high tech wall instead of a concrete or steel one. I fail to see this as of much significance. But it’s a nice talking point.

 

[Lanny]

Ok, what exactly are you talking about, anyway? You say landlines (which usually means copper phone lines) and I say that's everywhere, and you say no, you mean high speed lines, but you also say we aren't talking about fiber, so... what do you have in mind? Cable? That's certainly more than 1%.

barfo

These days land lines include fiber optic cables. There's also relays and satellites involved.

Says the guy who complains here frequently about his lack of service.



I don't think you can get anything over the air that is 4 times faster than fiber. Maybe 4 times faster than what you had before, I'd believe that.

barfo

No landline that's not fiber optic even approaches the speed or capacity of fiber optics. They are in two different universes. Whoever is trying to tell you different, and I can't see who it is, is full of shit. They obviously know nothing about physics.
You, on the other hand, are dead on.
I say this as a registered professional electrical engineer.

Edit: I'm not sure how this happens but I think I know. I sometimes get two different responses intertwined.

 

[Lanny]

Note that I already noted all of this above. So eight Democrats are toeing the party line and one Republican wants a high tech wall instead of a concrete or steel one. I fail to see this as of much significance. But it’s a nice talking point.

Here's what you said in it's entirety:
"Agree completely with the first paragraph. The second one is nonsense. I looked up congressional representatives for Texas and Arizona. Texas has 36 reps about 2/3 of whom are Republicans. First guy I googled about the wall, Louie Gohmert, is fully supportive of Trump on the wall. I picked a random Republican Arizona rep, Martha McSally, and she says, "It needs to be a bottom-up approach as far as what the agents need, what the sectors need," McSally said during a discussion on border security last year. "But it certainly includes the border wall, access roads, agents patrolling the border, technology and situational awareness, so they can detect and shut down the activity.""
1. You called McSally a representative;
2. No where did you disclaim representative Gohmert as a non border constituent.
What is with all these errors? And why do you persist in them?

 

[e_blazer]

Here's what you said in it's entirety:
"Agree completely with the first paragraph. The second one is nonsense. I looked up congressional representatives for Texas and Arizona. Texas has 36 reps about 2/3 of whom are Republicans. First guy I googled about the wall, Louie Gohmert, is fully supportive of Trump on the wall. I picked a random Republican Arizona rep, Martha McSally, and she says, "It needs to be a bottom-up approach as far as what the agents need, what the sectors need," McSally said during a discussion on border security last year. "But it certainly includes the border wall, access roads, agents patrolling the border, technology and situational awareness, so they can detect and shut down the activity.""
1. You called McSally a representative;
2. No where did you disclaim representative Gohmert as a non border constituent.
What is with all these errors? And why do you persist in them?

And here’s what I said after Barfo pointed out that you were talking about representatives of districts actually bordering Mexico:

“Ah. I guess I didn't get the Democrat talking points so I missed the subtlety of the argument. So, there are nine House districts across 4 states that border Mexico. Eight of these seats are held by Democrats, so it isn't hard to guess which way they're voting. The lone Republican, Will Hurd of Texas, opposes a concrete/steel slat wall. Instead, he favors a "smart wall".

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/us/politics/will-hurd-border-wall-trump.html

While the claim that no representatives of districts along the border support the wall makes a nice talking point, I don't think it means much in the overall debate. Actually, that's not correct. There is no debate going on, just people entrenched in highly partisan positions. And that's my problem with the state of this whole issue.

The first issue that needs to be tackled is the very notion of do we want a secure border, do we want to let things continue with the chaos that currently exists, or do we want something in the middle. That discussion needs to include policy decisions about what we want to do with immigration laws in general, and of course the issue of what to do with the millions of undocumented people who are already here. I don't see how we can move on in the discussion of the wall until there is some resolution of these issues. It's going to take leadership and compromise, so I have little hope that the current crop of dopes in DC have any chance of getting anywhere soon on a resolution.

Securing the border, if that's the direction we want to go, should be a matter of studying what makes the most sense in given areas along the border with Mexico. It should be done with a cost benefit type of analysis of what will work the best in those varying segments of the border. That kind of study needs to be nonpartisan and it needs to include all of the various law enforcement and border security agencies.

Yeah. I'm tilting at windmills this morning. It's much easier to sit back and yell at each other and continue to use this issue as a means of convincing your base of just how truly awful the "other side" is.”

 

[Lanny]

And here’s what I said after Barfo pointed out that you were talking about representatives of districts actually bordering Mexico:

“Ah. I guess I didn't get the Democrat talking points so I missed the subtlety of the argument. So, there are nine House districts across 4 states that border Mexico. Eight of these seats are held by Democrats, so it isn't hard to guess which way they're voting. The lone Republican, Will Hurd of Texas, opposes a concrete/steel slat wall. Instead, he favors a "smart wall".

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/us/politics/will-hurd-border-wall-trump.html

While the claim that no representatives of districts along the border support the wall makes a nice talking point, I don't think it means much in the overall debate. Actually, that's not correct. There is no debate going on, just people entrenched in highly partisan positions. And that's my problem with the state of this whole issue.

The first issue that needs to be tackled is the very notion of do we want a secure border, do we want to let things continue with the chaos that currently exists, or do we want something in the middle. That discussion needs to include policy decisions about what we want to do with immigration laws in general, and of course the issue of what to do with the millions of undocumented people who are already here. I don't see how we can move on in the discussion of the wall until there is some resolution of these issues. It's going to take leadership and compromise, so I have little hope that the current crop of dopes in DC have any chance of getting anywhere soon on a resolution.

Securing the border, if that's the direction we want to go, should be a matter of studying what makes the most sense in given areas along the border with Mexico. It should be done with a cost benefit type of analysis of what will work the best in those varying segments of the border. That kind of study needs to be nonpartisan and it needs to include all of the various law enforcement and border security agencies.

Yeah. I'm tilting at windmills this morning. It's much easier to sit back and yell at each other and continue to use this issue as a means of convincing your base of just how truly awful the "other side" is.”

You were responding to Barfo's post and not mine. No problem, I can handle that.

There have been studies done on the efficacy of a wall versus other means of securing our border. I haven't seen a credible study that concludes that a wall is all that helpful. Now, the committee studying the efficacy of a Wall has reached a compromise of $1.35 Billion for new wall construction after receiving a lot of input from our border security personnel. I think that's too much for a Wall but if it averts a shutdown, then it's a worthy compromise.

The voters will have to decide this issue in the 2020 general election.

 

[e_blazer]

You were responding to Barfo's post and not mine. No problem, I can handle that.

There have been studies done on the efficacy of a wall versus other means of securing our border. I haven't seen a credible study that concludes that a wall is all that helpful. Now, the committee studying the efficacy of a Wall has reached a compromise of $1.35 Billion for new wall construction after receiving a lot of input from our border security personnel. I think that's too much for a Wall but if it averts a shutdown, then it's a worthy compromise.

The voters will have to decide this issue in the 2020 general election.

Lanny, anyone who says walls alone will secure the border is a dumbass.

If you say it loudly, over and over again, at political rallies, you're the Dumbass in Chief.

If you say that walls have no effectiveness in certain locations and in combination with other security measures, you're a Democrat.

 

[Lanny]

Lanny, anyone who says walls alone will secure the border is a dumbass.

If you say it loudly, over and over again, at political rallies, you're the Dumbass in Chief.

If you say that walls have no effectiveness in certain locations and in combination with other security measures, you're a Democrat.

Well that last statement is not true. Democrats have advocated for walls in some areas, just not for 1,800 miles.

 

[e_blazer]

Well that last statement is not true. Democrats have advocated for walls in some areas, just not for 1,800 miles.

It's hard to find any of them who will admit to that right now in the midst of this budget standoff. But then, all politicians have selective memories.

 

[MARIS61]

The graph used in the article clearly shows the pieces of border obstructions erected in El Paso beginning in the 80's not only reduced violent crime in El Paso, but also in Texas and the US. Super impact.

But the real reason you ARE TOLD crime doesn't happen in El Paso is because it is entirely owned (Mayor and LEOS included) and operated by Mexican drug cartels. They don't want to draw attention to that.

Here's the real scoop.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/video/the-sun-city-cell/

 

[Lanny]

The graph used in the article clearly shows the pieces of border obstructions erected in El Paso beginning in the 80's not only reduced violent crime in El Paso, but also in Texas and the US. Super impact.

But the real reason you ARE TOLD crime doesn't happen in El Paso is because it is entirely owned (Mayor and LEOS included) and operated by Mexican drug cartels. They don't want to draw attention to that.

Here's the real scoop.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/video/the-sun-city-cell/

ha ha ha ha
What is this, April first?

 

[barfo]

The graph used in the article clearly shows the pieces of border obstructions erected in El Paso beginning in the 80's not only reduced violent crime in El Paso, but also in Texas and the US. Super impact.

But the real reason you ARE TOLD crime doesn't happen in El Paso is because it is entirely owned (Mayor and LEOS included) and operated by Mexican drug cartels. They don't want to draw attention to that.

Here's the real scoop.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/video/the-sun-city-cell/

Also, because the population is descended in large part from aliens from nearby Area 51, they lack the digestive juices necessary to process human food and subsist entirely on drugs, small pebbles, and fingernail polish. Beto is the leader of the El Paso drug cartel and is the brother of El Chapo, who Beto will set free when he steals the election. Old El Paso hot sauce is laced with PCP and other mind-controlling drugs intended to make the population in other states compliant.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press...freeway-for-drug-human-trafficking-terrorism/

 

[barfo]

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press...freeway-for-drug-human-trafficking-terrorism/

Wait, so you mean the wall doesn't work?

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

Meet some of El Paso's finest!

 

[Lanny]

Meet some of El Paso's finest!

Where's you proof that
1. They were Liberals;
2. They are typical of Liberals.
Huh? You got anything credible (Fox News doesn't count)?

 

[riverman]

We do not, because of the physical difficulties, where using the airwaves is relatively easy.

If this were the case, the Alaskan Hi way wouldn't exist...most of our rails wouldn't exist...the railroad owns some of the most beautiful, scenic acreage in the country and the rails are already in most places...what's inefficient is the wooden telephone pole or electric line..now that's a waste of material and manpower if there ever was one.....power companies and telecommunications companies resisted underground cable for way to long for the very reason you seem to be anti high speed rail..we'd have no Panama Canal if this were the line of thinking when faced with a challenge.

 

[riverman]

Twitter is about the only way he has of getting the word out to people that want to hear it. The News media sure as hell won't tell it straight.

covfefe!

 

[riverman]

Meet some of El Paso's finest!

So it looks like your trip was a full success.....you got the money shot

 

[Lanny]

If this were the case, the Alaskan Hi way wouldn't exist...most of our rails wouldn't exist...the railroad owns some of the most beautiful, scenic acreage in the country and the rails are already in most places...what's inefficient is the wooden telephone pole or electric line..now that's a waste of material and manpower if there ever was one.....power companies and telecommunications companies resisted underground cable for way to long for the very reason you seem to be anti high speed rail..we'd have no Panama Canal if this were the line of thinking when faced with a challenge.

There are more power losses in underground cable than in overhead wires. Then you've got the issue of people cutting the lines and either killing the workman or losing power or both.
I too, would like to see underground cables but expect to see some new problems.

I had a roommate in college who's dad was a high voltage electrician for Bonneville power. One day he was working on a generator line when someone switched the wrong switch and made his line live. It threw him across the room but guess what? He survived.
More trivia free of charge.
You could say something like, what a swell guy, Lanny.

 

[riverman]

Meet some of El Paso's finest!

Looks like Mary has a beard

 

[riverman]

There are more power losses in underground cable than in overhead wires. Then you've got the issue of people cutting the lines and either killing the workman or losing power or both.
I too, would like to see underground cables but expect to see some new problems.

My son has done this for decades and he says it's all about overtime pay during storm season....and super labor intensive to maintain

 

[Lanny]

Looks like Mary has a beard

Little known factoid, Mary had a beard.

 

[Lanny]

My son has done this for decades and he says it's all about overtime pay during storm season....and super labor intensive to maintain

Still, what I said is true.

 

[MarAzul]

He's an idiot.

If this were the case, the Alaskan Hi way wouldn't exist...most of our rails wouldn't exist...the railroad owns some of the most beautiful, scenic acreage in the country and the rails are already in most places...what's inefficient is the wooden telephone pole or electric line..now that's a waste of material and manpower if there ever was one.....power companies and telecommunications companies resisted underground cable for way to long for the very reason you seem to be anti high speed rail..we'd have no Panama Canal if this were the line of thinking when faced with a challenge.

Hey river!!!
Stick you head outside. You don't have rail every where. What the hell are you selling? You have rail down the I 5 and over the I 84.
But we have high speed communications even in Bandon. Even Myrtle Point. All over the state. It is lovely though, way more enjoyable than air travel.

Did you not get the word? The new Dem Governor in Cal, shot down that high speed rail from SAC, San Fransisco to LA. I guess he did not get AOC's memo.
Dang! After pissing away 3 or 4 billion of federal money too.