| 0 |
Subject: Minnesota Bridge Collapse
Posted by: Boxman
- [571114225] Wed, Aug 01, 2007, 20:22
I change the channel for my nightly dose of O'Reilly when Fox reports this.
A freeway bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis collapsed Wednesday, sending many cars into the water, injuring 20 to 30 people, authorities tell FOX News.
Tons of concrete have collapsed and people are injured. Survivors are being carried up the riverbank.
This bridge connects downtown Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota.
The entire span of the 35W bridge collapsed about 6:05 p.m. where the freeway crosses the river near University Avenue.
Some people are stranded on parts of the bridge that aren't completely in the water.
A tractor-trailer is on fire at the collapse scene.
Any Minnesota area gurupies?
Fox News has stated that Homeland Security says this does not look like terrorism. They are citing heavy construction in the bridge area as the primary reason to not think of terrorism right now. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 30 | sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 11:19
|
Engineers say 1 in 4 American bridges is "structurally" deficient....
Aug. 2, 2007 - Are America's bridges at risk? A 2003 report from the American Society of Civil Engineers called 27 percent of American bridges “structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.” The picture in U.S. cities is worse: the report says that one in three urban bridges qualifies as “structurally deficient.” NEWSWEEK'S Kendyl Saalcito talked to Edwin Rossow, professor emeritus of civil engineering at Northwestern University, about the safety of American bridges.
Terrorists...yea right.
|
| 31 | sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 11:40
|
Only 4% of US bridges, ranked worse than Minn bridge. Ranked 1 step above "intolerable"
I-35 bridge was rated among the nation's worst
In 2005 inspection, Minneapolis span was only one step above 'intolerable'
OK..I'm satisfied. Infrastructure was/is the problem...not Muslim jihadists.
|
| 32 | Perm Dude
ID: 3775538
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 11:52
|
Unless al-Qaeda was sending guys to out of the way construction and engineering schools, learning how to half-connect I-beams....
"I always wondered why Abdul spent so much time starting to weld stuff, and then quit part-way through..."
|
| 33 | sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 11:56
|
From looking at construction crews in this part of the country PD, it would require Al Qeada to first recruit hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of 2 yr old Mexicans. Then wait for them to reach age 15-17 or so, and then bring them into the US for training and employment on road crews.
Quite the long-term plan and very well executed, if one wishes to adhere to blaming terrorists for the incident.
;)
|
| 34 | holt
ID: 41512278
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 15:33
|
blowing up a single bridge would totally not be worth the effort of a terrorist here in the states. we may not see another terrorist act here until we are finally hit by a full-fledged nuclear weapon. can you say bye-bye Hollywood?
|
| 35 | sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 16:34
|
Hollywood? Thats more likely to be a target of the RNC than of Al Qeada.
|
| 36 | holt
ID: 41512278
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 16:38
|
it's just a hop-skip away from mexico. you don't think they'd love to nuke it? or las vegas maybe? not that the location matters much. I just have a hard time imagining terrorists NOT getting a nuke or two at some point in this century, or within 20 yrs even.
this is way off-topic from bridge collapse though.
|
| 37 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 22:29
|
I'm not saying directly that had it not been for the Iraq war then this wouldn't have happened... one can only speculate as to how funds might have been appropriated and spent... - Doug
OMG, but yes laughter is the best medicine.
My two Twin City sons didn't commute over that bridge so I was pretty sure I had nothing to worry about and I was relieved to be right.
Been over that bridge myself.
Dem talkin heads have already been quoted saying, 'Does this bridge collapse help the Democrats?'
Craven and echoed in here. Their lust for power is all consuming.
|
| 38 | Perm Dude
ID: 45749319
Fri, Aug 03, 2007, 22:54
|
The "Dem talking heads" have an all-consuming lust for power?
That's probably why they are just talking heads. Put 'em in power, and they might start a war or something. Wouldn't want that...
|
| 39 | Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Sat, Aug 04, 2007, 00:16
|
they might start a war or something
...or disregard long cherished civil rights and policies that used to seperate America from regimes we regarded as totalitarian and tyrannical.
|
| 40 | blue hen
ID: 59745323
Sat, Aug 04, 2007, 00:46
|
I saw the remains of the bridge today. It's a scary sight. I'm amazed that the death toll was so low...
|
| 41 | Doug
ID: 113132214
Sat, Aug 04, 2007, 02:31
|
Baldwin, did you even bother to read #27, where I explicitly stated that it doesn't matter who's in control (as in, either party), Congress still would need to act (implying that it has failed to do for quite some time, under multiple exec/leg power configurations)? Both parties have failed miserably in this regard, which almost goes without saying I think.
But even if it's "reactive" measures we're discussing at this point, if we want to (finally) address some of our infrastructure issues, we have to do sight within the context of our current fiscal situation, which is IMHO a dire one, and one which greatly impacts our ability to act.
I'm not allowed to point this out, or express my perceptions on the course of events that most directly led us to this point? It's somehow inherently partisan to attempt to learn from recent history... or is it only partisan when I point out that I feel errors in judgment were made? Are no criticisms allowed? Should we only explore this issue in a vacuum, devoid of the overall current state of affairs?
In short, I can't discuss the sad state of federal appropriations and the squandering of resources without it being a way to wage battle in some sort of "Dems vs. Reps" or "red vs. blue" type of feud?
Sorry, but frankly I choose not to think in those terms... when I share my thoughts it's not an attempt to advance any particular party's agenda or score points or what have you... it's just... my thoughts. I didn't get my talking points emailed to me by the DNC or RNC.
FWIW, I'm not a big fan of the two-party state, and never have been (nor do I expect that I ever will be) a member of either the Democratic or Republican parties.
|
| 42 | Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Sat, Aug 04, 2007, 09:03
|
Doug, don't take crotchety old Baldwin too seriously. His weeklong fits of insomnia make him unbearably cranky and clearly cloud his ability to think objectively (unfortunately for me and others however, his affliction doesn't seem to hamper his fantasy baseball management skills in the slightest).
Since the day after the collapse, Dems in Congress have pointed fingers at the GOP for failing to pass the Water Resources Development Act for the past 7 years.
I have no idea whether passing WRDA could have been the difference in averting the disaster or whether the thing should have been passed at all. But according to Baldwin, the media is power hungry for considering the political outcomes of Harry Reid's and others' assertions.
This from the same man who chastizes the media for failing to adequately report a 1970s era lawsuit from an environmental group called Save our Wetlands as the reason for why the New Orleans levy system failed to prevent the Hurricane Katrina disaster. As far as Baldwin is concerned, environmentalists (and by obvious proxy, the Democratic Party) are responsible for the Katrina disaster and the mainstream media exposes its glaring pro-liberal bias in failing to stand on their chairs and scream out, "the environmentalists did it!"
See posts 117 through 182 here for our most extensive discussion on that particular matter.
|
| 43 | Baldwin
ID: 14358177
Sat, Aug 04, 2007, 19:59
|
Doug
Wasn't trying to single you out, but those talking points are just out there in the air and you picked up on them. Don't get too close or you'll pick up sympathetic vibrations from the liberal echo chamber that is the MSM.
|
| 44 | Tree
ID: 28711522
Sun, Aug 05, 2007, 23:22
|
the liberal echo chamber that is the MSM
apparently, that lawsuit MITH mentioned isn't the only thing from the 70s that Baldwin keeps trotting out...
|
| 45 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Mon, Aug 06, 2007, 14:28
|
I suppose a clever debater would call the following 'a craven attempt by the anti-globalist crowd to take advantage of the bridge collapse'...
...then again I am thinking about rerouting my future trips to Minneapolis. A person can hardly be too careful.
|
| 46 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Mon, Aug 06, 2007, 15:13
|
when you do reroute your future trips to minneapolis, you may want to consider also not using a car, because, over one million people a year die in automobile accidents!!!...
|
| 47 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Mon, Aug 06, 2007, 23:07
|
Preserving the IQ's of those exposed to Tree is a full time job.
Less than 40K people die in traffic accidents in this country yearly.
|
| 48 | Tree
ID: 52736618
Mon, Aug 06, 2007, 23:54
|
thin skin much, Baldy? Or just getting to the point in your advanced age where you're imagining things, can't read, and suffering from dementia?
no where did i mention anything about accidents in this country.
according to the WHO, 1.2 million people are killed in motor vehicle accidents each year...
now, back to your statement of Less than 40K people die in traffic accidents in this country yearly.
either you're lying, or just didn't bother to look up the facts.
in 2006, 42,642 people died in traffic accidents in the U.S. (to clarify - that number is definitely MORE than 40,000.).
Additionally, that number is the lowest total in 15 years, so you'd have to go back to AT LEAST the early 90s to find a number below 40,000, if not further.
All of this to say that you stand a better chance dying by simply pulling out of your driveway than you do crossing a river on a bridge.
|
| 49 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 07:54
|
Is he even worthy of an answer?
no where did i mention anything about accidents in this country
But people always assume you are talking about this country and you relied on that to inflate the sense of risk.
either you're lying, or just didn't bother to look up the facts.
I looked this up before posting yesterday.
you may want to consider also not using a car
You will see that the number of people who 'used their car' and died in a traffic fatality was under 40K in every year listed.
|
| 50 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 10:57
|
But people always assume you are talking about this country and you relied on that to inflate the sense of risk.
why would they assume anything like that? there was no implication of that at all.
I looked this up before posting yesterday.
as did i. just because you can't read what someone says and then read a subsequent chart doesn't mean that someone else is wrong.
your link very clearly shows that well over 40,000 people die in traffic accidents in this country yearly. (your words in italics).
You need to read the whole chart, not just part of it (presumably, you just read the top line, and that's where you got your figure below 40,000).
it's a mistake any of us could make, so it's no biggie, but you oughta own up to it instead of digging a deeper hole.
|
| 51 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 12:01
|
So what Baldwin? Around 40,000 Americans die in car accidents each year. You can play your idiot semantics games with Tree if you want to try to establish your lowball number if you want.
How many people die in bridge collapses - on or off you "superhighway"? That number isn't even the same order of magnitude as the car accident number is it?
If you want to plan your future trips to avoid this "superhighway" for fear of future bridge collapses be my guest, but you are clearly missing the much bigger threat of getting behind the wheel in the first place.
Or maybe this is all a bunch of hot air designed to derail the criticism from your Bush administration because they have clearly limited the US Government's ability to pay for much needed infrastructure maintenance and you cannot counter that argument.
|
| 52 | Boxman
ID: 136161615
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:12
|
Or maybe this is all a bunch of hot air designed to derail the criticism from your Bush administration because they have clearly limited the US Government's ability to pay for much needed infrastructure maintenance and you cannot counter that argument.
That's bollocks.
The Iraq War is primarily responsible for us running a deficit. Are you suggesting an equivolent deficit to fix bridges?
We need to stop assuming that government must run a deficit just to pay for all of society's ills.
|
| 53 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:14
|
If you want to plan your future trips to avoid this "superhighway" for fear of future bridge collapses be my guest, but you are clearly missing the much bigger threat of getting behind the wheel in the first place.
thank you.
The Iraq War is primarily responsible for us running a deficit. Are you suggesting an equivolent deficit to fix bridges?
i'm suggesting the money could certainly have gone elsewhere than to begin a fool's war.
|
| 54 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:18
|
The Iraq War is primarily responsible for us running a deficit.
Strognly agreed.
Are you suggesting an equivolent deficit to fix bridges?
No
We need to stop assuming that government must run a deficit just to pay for all of society's ills.
Who assumed this?
So who are you arguing with Boxman?
|
| 55 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:20
|
At first blush you wouldn't think there wouldn't be very much of substance we could add to discussing a bridge collapse. I think the possibility that the route was under considerably heavier usage than expected is an interesting angle.
The angle that if only we had an isolationist Dem administration who was spending domestically...not so much.
|
| 56 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:27
|
Admittedly if Algore had been elected and managed to outlaw the internal combustion engine or liberals had taxed us out of our cars and zoned us out of our suburban sprawl and into their urban ghettoes and onto their public transportation, this collapse might not have happened.
You don't hear about too many bike path collapses.
[I need to take a shower...getting into the liberal mindset gives me the creeps]
|
| 57 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:28
|
At first blush you wouldn't think there wouldn't be very much of substance we could add to discussing a bridge collapse. I think the possibility that the route was under considerably heavier usage than expected is an interesting angle.
Its a given that the route is under heavier usage then it was designed for. This is due to the lack of instrastructure spending. Every major route is under heavier usage then it was designed for.
If they built another highway from the Western Suburbs into Chicago that was roughly equivalent in size to the Stevenson or the Eisenhower expressways today, it would be under heavier usage then either the Stevenson or Eisenhower was designed for in the first place. Thats how far behind the infrastructure spending is in many places.
|
| 58 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:31
|
Admittedly if Algore had been elected and managed to outlaw the internal combustion engine or liberals had taxed us out of our cars and zoned us out of our suburban sprawl and into their urban ghettoes and onto their public transportation, this collapse might not have happened.
[I need to take a shower...getting into the liberal mindset gives me the creeps]
Either this whole post is 100% disingenous strawman or you have no idea what a liberal mindset is.
Even your strawmen disgust you so much that you claim to need a shower after suggesting one.
|
| 59 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:32
|
I'll tell you another interesting angle. The power elite would loooooove to force us to accept tollroads everywhere. Watch them try to use this as a lever towards more of that.
|
| 60 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:38
|
Who are these power elite?
The Bush family? Haliburton?
Or some nebulous unnamed enemy to attack since your liberal strawman failed?
|
| 61 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:39
|
Hack:
Algore made it clear in his book that he favors the elimination of the internal combustion engine.
Liberals love to boost taxes on gasoline, and add costs, regulations and redtape to drivers. They love playing god with their social planning and their public projects like public transportation.
If you think they don't intend on pressuring us off the land and confine us into concentrated urban areas it is you who are not keeping up with their plans.
|
| 62 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:41
|
And you keep trying to prop up your strawman despite the fact it was totally stupid from the beginning.
|
| 63 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:43
|
I think it was PV who inspired me to plan a thread answering your last question. Under construction...I've been working on it and it is my best thread ever.
It'll blow everyone's mind, draw a troll and swineherd trampling like you've never seen, but years later you'll remember you learned it here first.
Not guaranteeing I can maintain my interest in the troll bridge this place has become since I left tho.
|
| 64 | CanadianHack
ID: 40849193
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:50
|
Baldwin crying as he leaves the room: I'm gonna prove this isn't a strawman. I'm really gonna do it. Someday. And its gonna be good. Really good. Best I ever did. I swear you are gonna like it.
(And of course has to throw in a disclaimer like)
Not guaranteeing I can maintain my interest in the troll bridge this place has become since I left tho.
Which is already a built in explanation for why he will fail in building this immaculate thread.
I have never seen somebody leave this forum while simultaneously posting as frequently as Baldwin. "Leaving" is just an excuse for not responding when he is clearly proven wrong and cannot find a way to weasel himself out.
|
| 65 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:51
|
i'll take 55 and 56 at your mea culpas on trying to pass off inaccurate numbers as facts, but no need to apologize Baldwin. you've been wrong before, and you'll be wrong again. no biggie.
The power elite would loooooove to force us to accept tollroads everywhere. Watch them try to use this as a lever towards more of that.
unless you make every road a toll road, there's nothing to force you - it's a decision. this weekend, coming back from my parents' place in the mountains, i could have paid the toll on the thruway - instead, i took old Route 17. a much more enjoyable drive.
|
| 66 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:52
|
He's been doing it for years.
|
| 67 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 454491514
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 13:53
|
66 responds to 64
|
| 68 | Pancho Villa
ID: 495272016
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 15:11
|
Algore made it clear in his book that he favors the elimination of the internal combustion engine.
Am I the only one who seriously doubts that Baldwin has read Al Gore's book, but is simply parroting something he read on NewsMax or WorldNetDaily?
|
| 69 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 15:19
|
Algore made it clear in his book that he favors the elimination of the internal combustion engine.
so why exactly is this a bad idea?
and never mind the fact that it's happening, slowly but surely - i know it's kinda modern and scary for some people, but they do have these new vehicles called "hybrids."...
|
| 70 | sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 16:18
|
IMO, the only thing stopping us all from driving solar-powered vehicles, is battery technology. That comes "of age", and bingo....
|
| 71 | Baldwin
ID: 125312919
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 18:39
|
I only wish great posters like Madman had left as incompletely as I have.
|
| 72 | biliruben
ID: 35112816
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 18:58
|
I agree.
|
| 73 | Perm Dude
ID: 1871978
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 19:13
|
Yeah, but he's married with a kid now. Maybe he'll be back in some form, but I don't think he's got much time these days!
|
| 74 | Pancho Villa
ID: 495272016
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 19:53
|
Wow, Madman named his kid after Seattle Zen!
|
| 75 | Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 20:09
|
I hadn't realized Madman was Ken Burns.
|
| 76 | Perm Dude
ID: 1871978
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 20:21
|
It explains a lot...
|
| 77 | Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 21:51
|
71
You said it, brother.
73
Wow! It's always great to see what one of you looks like for the first time. I don't know whether he ever lurks around but in case he does he has my sincerest congratulations, wishing him and his family the best.
|
| 78 | Mattinglyinthehall
Leader
ID: 01629107
Tue, Aug 07, 2007, 21:53
|
By the way, I think he looks more like a young Don Mattingly. :)
|
| 79 | Mark L
ID: 25155512
Wed, Aug 08, 2007, 12:02
|
I only met him ftf once, but I don't remember the facial hair.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|