re: #214 dangerman-call me sandy, not a drink named Steve

anytime we discuss ‘the wall’ we give it legitimacy
we then argue about examples, comparisons, details, funding, why and whether it would work or not, the how, constitutionality, emergencies, eminent domain, ad infinito

rather than simply “a wall is not who we are as a country” and deserves no further consideration

I will say it again: If DT had been the least bit serious about The Wall as anything but a rallying point and a symbol, he would have commissioned a planning, engineering, environmental and legal impact study, presented design proposals, a budget and a timetable.

He claims that he has experience with large-scale construction projects, but he has yet to do any of those things.