Frightening

[The T]

"Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood hailed China as a model for government efficiency this week, saying: "The Chinese are more successful [in building infrastructure] because in their country, only three people make the decision. In our country, 3,000 people do, 3 million."

The left has become so radical, it is down right crazy. They bash freedom, choice, and America while praising Communism, oppression, and dictators. Can you imagine just 20 years ago a member of any presidents cabinet stating that China is so much better because just a few dictators make all the decisions, while America sucks because we have discussions and debate on what is best?

This party has become so radical and so unhinged. Thankfully, because of that, their numbers are shrinking every year (down to a laughable 21% of American's who are registered Democrats). If not for that, these maniacs would be a serious threat to the globe.

Sorry, but China is not a communistic country, they have reformed into a capitalistic socialist nation. But you must remember that politics and military are over loaded with hollow accolades.

Holy shades of Tienanmen Square! You don't say!

Scary shit, isn't it? These DERPS have no clue.

 

[konradv]

"Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood hailed China as a model for government efficiency this week, saying: "The Chinese are more successful [in building infrastructure] because in their country, only three people make the decision. In our country, 3,000 people do, 3 million."

The left has become so radical, it is down right crazy. They bash freedom, choice, and America while praising Communism, oppression, and dictators. Can you imagine just 20 years ago a member of any presidents cabinet stating that China is so much better because just a few dictators make all the decisions, while America sucks because we have discussions and debate on what is best?

This party has become so radical and so unhinged. Thankfully, because of that, their numbers are shrinking every year (down to a laughable 21% of American's who are registered Democrats). If not for that, these maniacs would be a serious threat to the globe.

Hmmm..., y'all are always saying the beaurocracy is too big. Didn't quite think that one out, eh?

 

[naturegirl]

Oh and just to add a little more insult to your completely pathetic point, the reason the president is given the power to command the military and not congress is because in a war you need quick efficient decisions and this requires a single leader. It is clear that the US government, its creators, and most people recognize that there is efficiency and purpose in having some decisions made by a singular or very small group of representatives.

Ahhhh, you've completely fallen for the left rhetoric. The President doesn't have the power to go to war without Congressional approval even if Obama thinks he can. There is a BIG reason the founding fathers set our government up with three equally powerful branches. It has nothing to do with what Obamavider spews or does. He has trampled the constitution over and over and you still defend him. He is not the most powerful person in the United States, it's a shame you think he is.

 

[The T]

Actually, it would be much more efficient to have a couple of people make a decision than to have congress argue about it incessantly. This is not saying the decisions are always good, but that they are more efficient. I know that is an advanced point that your feeble little mind could not possibly contemplate so you fall back on the idea that anyone who says something about china that is not an insult must automatically be a communist idiot, but in this case it is merely a fact that to get 3 people to agree and start moving is a hell of a lot easier to get a few hundred to agree and move forward. There is a saying that too many chiefs fuck things up, and it is pretty well established that this is a fact.

Actually, tererun, King George thought it most efficient not to allow any Colonial American to represent American issues in his court.

FAIL!!!

That is FACT. Franklin considered himself lucky he wasn't drawn and Quartered on the floor of the Parliment as HE was our representative in not only the UK, but in Paris in this period.

Happily? he came out unscathed, and admired...especially by the ladies.

 

[freedombecki]

Sorry, but China is not a communistic country, they have reformed into a capitalistic socialist nation. But you must remember that politics and military are over loaded with hollow accolades.

Holy shades of Tienanmen Square! You don't say!

Scary shit, isn't it? These DERPS have no clue.

They wouldn't be talking so big if their OWS protests had been dealt with as the Reds did at Tienanmen--mowing people down with Type 59 Tanks and jailing many. Half a million people witnessed that turkey.

​

 

[Moonglow]

China is not a communist country, try again.

 

[ladyliberal]

The original poster suggested that Lahood was a radical leftist. Freedombecki said that he was a Democrat. He is not. He's a Republican who represented IL-18 for seven terms and who endorsed John McCain for president (Ray LaHood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

His Republicanism notwithstanding, Lahood's views on the efficiency of Chinese infrastructure policy seem difficult to dispute. As Vast LWC has noted, he was careful to say that the US has a superior political system even as he noted its limitations.

 

[naturegirl]

China is not a communist country, try again.

Hey Moonie, you are so very wrong. China is indeed still communist.

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still a Communist State

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still considered a Communist State. However the source does note some economic changes since the 1970s (see below). A country's economic policy is only one part of it's government, so just because economic policies are changing doesn't necessarily mean the system of government has changed. See below for CIA World Fact Book's discussion of China's economic policy:

[ame=http://askville.amazon.com/China-communist/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=8421289]Is China communist?[/ame]

 

[Moonglow]

Oh and just to add a little more insult to your completely pathetic point, the reason the president is given the power to command the military and not congress is because in a war you need quick efficient decisions and this requires a single leader. It is clear that the US government, its creators, and most people recognize that there is efficiency and purpose in having some decisions made by a singular or very small group of representatives.

Ahhhh, you've completely fallen for the left rhetoric. The President doesn't have the power to go to war without Congressional approval even if Obama thinks he can. There is a BIG reason the founding fathers set our government up with three equally powerful branches. It has nothing to do with what Obamavider spews or does. He has trampled the constitution over and over and you still defend him. He is not the most powerful person in the United States, it's a shame you think he is.

War Powers Act allows the president to act as seems fit militarily and ask for Congressional approval later.

 

[freedombecki]

Sorry, but China is not a communistic country, they have reformed into a capitalistic socialist nation. But you must remember that politics and military are over loaded with hollow accolades.

Holy shades of Tienanmen Square! You don't say!

Scary shit, isn't it? These DERPS have no clue.

We're good teachers.

 

[Moonglow]

China is not a communist country, try again.

Hey Moonie, you are so very wrong. China is indeed still communist.

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still a Communist State

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still considered a Communist State. However the source does note some economic changes since the 1970s (see below). A country's economic policy is only one part of it's government, so just because economic policies are changing doesn't necessarily mean the system of government has changed. See below for CIA World Fact Book's discussion of China's economic policy:

[ame=http://askville.amazon.com/China-communist/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=8421289]Is China communist?[/ame]

Looking for something?
We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Go to Amazon.com's Home Page

really, is that why capitalism is flurishing there? Same with Russia.

 

[Vast LWC]

Mouthing contradictory words that make oligarchical dealings sound acceptable doesn't change the unacceptable proposition. Frankly, it's an indefensible proposition, and you can't put lipstick on that pig, dear.

Wow, that is some kind of Orwellian double-speak.

What is it about "China's system may be more efficient, but ours is better" don't you understand, exactly?

Is it because, to right wingers, efficiency = good?

Well, I have news for you, that's not always true. As I said, the Nazis are a perfect example of that.

 

[The T]

Holy shades of Tienanmen Square! You don't say!

Scary shit, isn't it? These DERPS have no clue.

They wouldn't be talking so big if their OWS protests had been dealt with as the Reds did at Tienanmen--mowing people down with Type 59 Tanks and jailing many. Half a million people witnessed that turkey.

Maybe that's what OWS was hoping for?

 

[The T]

Holy shades of Tienanmen Square! You don't say!

Scary shit, isn't it? These DERPS have no clue.

We're good teachers.

Indeed. Whether they like it or not. They can pretend all they like...They're outclassed...Out Gunned...NON PC...and damned PROUD of it.

 

[naturegirl]

China is not a communist country, try again.

Hey Moonie, you are so very wrong. China is indeed still communist.

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still a Communist State

According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still considered a Communist State. However the source does note some economic changes since the 1970s (see below). A country's economic policy is only one part of it's government, so just because economic policies are changing doesn't necessarily mean the system of government has changed. See below for CIA World Fact Book's discussion of China's economic policy:

[ame=http://askville.amazon.com/China-communist/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=8421289]Is China communist?[/ame]

Looking for something?
We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Go to Amazon.com's Home Page

really, is that why capitalism is flurishing there? Same with Russia.

I just googled "Is China still communist?" and that was the first hit I got. Try it, you might learn something about China and it's Communist government.

 

[Vast LWC]

We're good teachers.

Of what?

Advanced courses in Orwellian double-speak?

"Talking points" 101?

"History of ignoring the existence of nuance"?

 

[freedombecki]

The original poster suggested that Lahood was a radical leftist. Freedombecki said that he was a Democrat. He is not. He's a Republican who represented IL-18 for seven terms and who endorsed John McCain for president (Ray LaHood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

His Republicanism notwithstanding, Lahood's views on the efficiency of Chinese infrastructure policy seem difficult to dispute. As Vast LWC has noted, he was careful to say that the US has a superior political system even as he noted its limitations.

Lahood's a Rino. Some people don't drop their affiliations, they just support the other party on 90% of their issues and adopt the other party's goal. Lahood got a 0% conservative rating by conservative watchdog groups for coast to coast. Right now, his boss is his soulmate, the most radical leftwing person in the Senate during his time on the Hill in that capacity.

Call him what you want. LaHood hasn't represented conservative Republicans in over 2 decades, regardless of what his signpost reads. It's ok, it's his calling to be liberal, it's just not the majority of Republicans who think spending is something a legislative body is expected to do. We expect our Congresscritters to eschew spending and hold back spending from the entitled spendthrifts the educational system and family breakdowns have produced.

LaHood doesn't speak for the Republican Party nor even care for it. Sorry, that's just how it is and has been for a long, long time.

 

[Moonglow]

Hey Moonie, you are so very wrong. China is indeed still communist.



Is China communist?

Looking for something?
We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Go to Amazon.com's Home Page

really, is that why capitalism is flurishing there? Same with Russia.

I just googled "Is China still communist?" and that was the first hit I got. Try it, you might learn something about China and it's Communist government.

The current Constitution is the PRC's 4th promulgation. On December 4, 1982, it was promulgated and has served as a stable Constitution for over 20 years. The role of the Presidency and the courts were normalized, and under the Constitution, all citizens were equal. Amendments were made in 1988, 1993, 1999, and most recently, in 2004, which recognized private property, safeguarded human rights, and further promoted the non-public sector of the economy

Not so communistic.

 

[P@triot]

Actually, it would be much more efficient to have a couple of people make a decision than to have congress argue about it incessantly. This is not saying the decisions are always good, but that they are more efficient. I know that is an advanced point that your feeble little mind could not possibly contemplate so you fall back on the idea that anyone who says something about china that is not an insult must automatically be a communist idiot, but in this case it is merely a fact that to get 3 people to agree and start moving is a hell of a lot easier to get a few hundred to agree and move forward. There is a saying that too many chiefs fuck things up, and it is pretty well established that this is a fact.

Except that the ultimate objective, stupid, is not to make things "easier". In fact, if you knew anything about the history of America (and you clearly don't), our government was intentionally designed to be slow and methodical because our founding fathers understood the dangers of power. Here, learn something for once, idiot liberal:

A classic anecdote has Thomas Jefferson asking George Washington about the purpose of the Senate. Washington responded with a question, "Why did you pour that coffee into your saucer?" "To cool it," Jefferson replied. To which Washington said; "Even so, we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it." The framers of the Constitution intended the Senate to cool legislation by being a more deliberative body than the House. It was smaller, members were older, Senators were elected for longer terms, and elections were staggered and decided by state legislatures.

 

[freedombecki]

We're good teachers.

Of what?

Advanced courses in Orwellian double-speak?

"Talking points" 101?

"History of ignoring the existence of nuance"?

A type 59 tank like those that dispersed protesters at Tienanmen Square is a unilateral decider, sweetcakes. There's no double speak involved there at all.