Pittsburgh bridge collapse

If anything it makes Pat Toomey look like a fool. He voted against infrastructure and it looks like it is desperately needed in the state. Originally Posted by CaptainTruth

Au contraire, Pat Toomey is one of the few people in Congress who haven’t sold their souls for pork to benefit their constituents and donors. The infrastructure bill did include $40 billion for bridges. But it also included money for lots of other stuff. For example, around 200 billion for green energy and greenhouse gas reduction.

Toomey might have voted for the bill if it were less wasteful and actually only included funding for needed infrastructure like bridges.

I don’t know jack about the bridge. If it was for a state or county highway, then the federal government had no business helping to maintain it anyway. The power of the purse and governmental oversight should be closest to the people, meaning at the state and local level if feasible.

Toomey’s possibly our smartest Senator. Too bad he’s not running for re-election.

Au contraire, Pat Toomey is one of the few people in Congress who haven’t sold their souls for pork to benefit their constituents and donors. The infrastructure bill did include $40 billion for bridges. But it also included money for lots of other stuff. For example, around 200 billion for green energy and greenhouse gas reduction.

Toomey might have voted for the bill if it were less wasteful and actually only included funding for needed infrastructure like bridges.

I don’t know jack about the bridge. If it was for a state or county highway, then the federal government had no business helping to maintain it anyway. The power of the purse and governmental oversight should be closest to the people, meaning at the state and local level if feasible.

Toomey’s possibly our smartest Senator. Too bad he’s not running for re-election. Originally Posted by Tiny

They will still tax the shit out of you and not one pot hole, bridge or any other structure will be repaired.

well well .. do we have a Navy vet here? if so .. then you know the rating in some classifications can have a longer than usual promotion. unless you happen to be either a snipe, boatswain's mate or a supply clerk. which one were you?


bahahahahaaaa Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Or it could be a picture taken about....ummm, seven years before I left the navy. What can you tell an idiot that can't think of simple things. (definitely deck ape) Papi probably thinks I still wear that uniform.

Au contraire, Pat Toomey is one of the few people in Congress who haven’t sold their souls for pork to benefit their constituents and donors. The infrastructure bill did include $40 billion for bridges. But it also included money for lots of other stuff. For example, around 200 billion for green energy and greenhouse gas reduction.

Toomey might have voted for the bill if it were less wasteful and actually only included funding for needed infrastructure like bridges.

I don’t know jack about the bridge. If it was for a state or county highway, then the federal government had no business helping to maintain it anyway. The power of the purse and governmental oversight should be closest to the people, meaning at the state and local level if feasible.

Toomey’s possibly our smartest Senator. Too bad he’s not running for re-election. Originally Posted by Tiny

Forbes Avenue...it was a city bridge with a city inspection. The city has been under democrat control since 1934. I think I see the problem.

This do called “infra structure bill” is Porkulus Magnus.

80 % of it is nothing but a huge vote buying scheme propagated by the Democrats.

Heck, I have you all beat.

I was drafted, and ETS’s out as an E5 under two.

Broken service. Left as an E-6 and had to come back in as an E-5.

....The infrastructure bill did include $40 billion for bridges. Originally Posted by Tiny

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-...bill/3684/text

I suppose "we" are discussing the same act of Congress ... but just in case I provided a "link," which seems like a popular request. I'm not sure where you got the "$40 billion for bridges," so since you've READ THE ENTIRE ACT you should know where it is stated as you have posted. I looked in 1117-1118, since it was designated in the index as being about "bridges."

PissLousy didn't read it, but I'm sure you have, because you in effect QUOTED IT.

This is what the LiarInChief has posted on his BullShit Page:

"It will rebuild the most economically significant bridges in the country as well as thousands of smaller bridges."

I toss the quote out as I have highlighted, because the Secretary has the authority to make a determination as to the value of a bridge for the purpose of authorizing a FEDERAL GRANT with language that sounds like a Fed Loan to be owed by the State or Local Government to whom the bridge will be "transferred" if it currently is considered a "Federal Bridge."

Like the Obamacare "LAW" ... it's always a good idea to read the "small print" in a "law" to determine what it really does or doesn't do, because those who drafted it and those who voted on it probably do not know what it says.

As the saying goes: "The "Devil" is in the details."

Example: I can imagine based on recent events that "bridges" on the East and West coasts will no doubt be "the most economically significant bridges" to be consistent with other decisions the clowns at the White House make.

Wasn't it the Republicans who tried to block the badly needed infrastructure bill ?

Wasn't it the Republicans who tried to block the badly needed infrastructure bill ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

#1: "badly needed" for whom?
#2: Democrats.

and there may be a similar issue with the affirmative action SCOTUS replacement planned by Bitten/Kumola, the AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POTUS/VPOTUS.

#1: Ask Pittsburgh drivers

#2: Republicans tried to block the infrastructure bill. The Trump administration couldn't even pass one. If they had, maybe the PIttsburgh disaster would never have happened.

Bike lanes for tranies, Climate Nazi corps and 3 trillion in new taxes isn’t gonna stabilize any bridges.

#1: Ask Pittsburgh drivers

#2: Republicans tried to block the infrastructure bill. The Trump administration couldn't even pass one. If they had, maybe the PIttsburgh disaster would never have happened. Originally Posted by VitaMan

Maybe if the last 10 democrat mayors would have done their job the bridge wouldn't have collapsed. They certainly have spent enough money on the riverfront the last 20-30 years

#1: Ask Pittsburgh drivers

#2: Republicans tried to block the infrastructure bill. The Trump administration couldn't even pass one. If they had, maybe the PIttsburgh disaster would never have happened. Originally Posted by VitaMan

“Disaster”? Who died? The fact of the matter is many of Pittsburghs bridges need repair. This has been a problem way before Trump became POTUS.

This was a true DISASTER;

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/54066...till-crumbling


Why didn’t Obama pass an infrastructure bill?

#1: Ask Pittsburgh drivers

#2: Republicans tried to block the infrastructure bill. The Trump administration couldn't even pass one. If they had, maybe the PIttsburgh disaster would never have happened. Originally Posted by VitaMan

#1: Do they have driver's licenses?
#2: Actually, the "Republicans" didn't try to "block it" as it arrived from the House heavily laden with bullshit handouts and voter bribes ... the Conservatives in both parties wanted an "infrastructure" bill for IMPROVING the physical characteristics of the United States with respect to roads, bridges, and buildings ... which have been traditionally INFRASTRUCTURE ...

the English language has a traditional definition for it:

the basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g. buildings, roads, power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.

Those are the kinds of improvements that benefit all people and most particularly those who are employed ... and/or are looking for jobs .... so they can traverse to and from work and possible work.

As for your uninformed remark about "Trump" .... Presidents of the United States do not "pass" legislation. But I can readily understand why you think otherwise, because you voted for Bitten and Kumola ... who think they do and claim they actual do.

The House was too busy wasting time during the Trump Administration attempting to undo the election by impeaching him, because they pretended to believe it was fraudulently obtained....you know, "Russian Collusion"!!!!!!!!!!