Frightening

[AmericanFirst]

"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.

yeds, this is a perfect example of obama's selections for people in office and it is downright scary. If it isn't van johnson , it's it's his economic team who have all left the scene or those who don't even pay their taxes but head the treasury dept. Just a shakin' my head.

--------- please don't forget his wonderful ag, eric holder who was cited for contempt! And the idiot george bush, who had brilliant people like condolessa rice as his sec of state and richard gates as sec. Of defence. Given the comparrison, who is the real idiot here?

bush, rice , and gates had smarts compared to the idiots in there now.

 

[The T]

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 disperse protesters at Tienanmen Square is a unilateral decider, sweetcakes. There's no double speak involved there at all.

Don't you love all the attempts to divert you and your attention?

Ah! The nerves touched in the Statist Psyche...

 

[P@triot]

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.

No stupid, that's not why. It has nothing to do with "quick" decisions and everything to do with dissenting opinions. If some people wanted to bomb in response to, say an attack like Pearl Harbor, and others didn't, who would win? When you're talking about military action, it requires one man to make the decision. When you're talking about laws, only a ******* idiot would advocate for one or two people having all the power. How well did that work under Saddam Hussein in Iraq, stupid?

You're such an ignorant ******* liberal.

 

[P@triot]

Congress incessantly ARGUING about something? Really Gracie/ Seems to me that they are forced into DEBATE...as they SHOULD be doing as the Representatives of the PEOPLE.

Balance of POWER and not rubberstamping LAW, and GRIDLOCK is rather REFRESHING...don't you think Pink Pony Moron?

Which makes it less efficient.

More efficient doesn't mean better.

The Nazis, for instance, were one of the most efficient societies in history.

That certainly doesn't mean their form of government was better.

Sadly, the idiot liberals like the pony here actually support the Nazi's. They are all about control...

 

[The T]

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.

No stupid, that's not why. It has nothing to do with "quick" decisions and everything to do with dissenting opinions. If some people wanted to bomb in response to, say an attack like Pearl Harbor, and others didn't, who would win? When you're talking about military action, it requires one man to make the decision. When you're talking about laws, only a ******* idiot would advocate for one or two people having all the power. How well did that work under Saddam Hussein in Iraq, stupid?

You're such an ignorant ******* liberal.

Concur. What Liberal uses logic? Anser? Very few. The PINK PONY isn't one of them either.

 

[freedombecki]

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.

Not so fast, dear. You didn't read this news from China?

Amnesty slams China for Uighur crackdown three years after riots - Yahoo! News Canada

Seems its the samo-samo human rights abuse situation.

Some people dig that lipstick on a pig stuff. Not me.

 

[The T]

Congress incessantly ARGUING about something? Really Gracie/ Seems to me that they are forced into DEBATE...as they SHOULD be doing as the Representatives of the PEOPLE.

Balance of POWER and not rubberstamping LAW, and GRIDLOCK is rather REFRESHING...don't you think Pink Pony Moron?

Which makes it less efficient.

More efficient doesn't mean better.

The Nazis, for instance, were one of the most efficient societies in history.

That certainly doesn't mean their form of government was better.

And BY YOUR synopsis? WHERE in my writings did I ever STATE that it was?

YOU have a STATIST propensity just LIKE the NAZI'S to twist words.

YOUR inference is there and don't deny it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"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.

The great center of America knows the fringe right of the Rottweilers are far more close to the fascist right than the liberals are to communist left.

STFU, you fringe wacks.

 

[P@triot]

"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?

Typical liberal LIE! When has a Conservative ever said that Congress was too big? When? What we've said is that the unconsitutional departments (like education, energy, etc.) were the beaurocratic problem. The federal government has 18 enumerated powers, and not one of them involves education, energy, etc.

 

[The T]

Congress incessantly ARGUING about something? Really Gracie/ Seems to me that they are forced into DEBATE...as they SHOULD be doing as the Representatives of the PEOPLE.

Balance of POWER and not rubberstamping LAW, and GRIDLOCK is rather REFRESHING...don't you think Pink Pony Moron?

Which makes it less efficient.

More efficient doesn't mean better.

The Nazis, for instance, were one of the most efficient societies in history.

That certainly doesn't mean their form of government was better.

Sadly, the idiot liberals like the pony here actually support the Nazi's. They are all about control...

Or SHITHEADS like LWC try to paint ME as a NAZI.

What a total horses' ASSHOLE he is.

 

[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.

The great center of America knows the fringe right of the Rottweilers are far more close to the fascist right than the liberals are to communist left.

STFU, you fringe wacks.

Fakey? YOU shut the **** UP. No one but yer leftist buttbuddies want to read what YOU have to state.

SHUT UP.

 

[AmericanFirst]

"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.

The great center of America knows the fringe right of the Rottweilers are far more close to the fascist right than the liberals are to communist left.

STFU, you fringe wacks.

WRONG!!! If you support obamaturd and the left, you are a commie, commie.

 

[P@triot]

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.

OMG are you STUPID! Capitalism is an economic system. You can be a capitalism economically and still be an oppresive dictatorship politically you stupid ******* moron..... You don't have the slightest idea what the term "Communism" actually means.

 

[AmericanFirst]

"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?

Typical liberal LIE! When has a Conservative ever said that Congress was too big? When? What we've said is that the unconsitutional departments (like education, energy, etc.) were the beaurocratic problem. The federal government has 18 enumerated powers, and not one of them involves education, energy, etc.

Libs don't think, they have nothing to think with.

 

[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.

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.

I call him a Republican, just like the voters who elected him seven times with an "R" after his name. You called him a Democrat who was a member of the Democratic party. And as near as I can tell (see, eg, 2005 U.S. House Votes) have ranked Lahood well to the right of center, not 100% liberal as you claim.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"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.

The great center of America knows the fringe right of the Rottweilers are far more close to the fascist right than the liberals are to communist left.

STFU, you fringe wacks.

Fakey? YOU shut the **** UP. No one but yer leftist buttbuddies want to read what YOU have to state. SHUT UP.

You fringe fascists to the far right are laughable, all four of you in the country.

 

[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.

I call him a Republican, just like the voters who elected him seven times with an "R" after his name. You called him a Democrat who was a member of the Democratic party. And as near as I can tell (see, eg, 2005 U.S. House Votes) have ranked Lahood well to the right of center, not 100% liberal as you claim.

I didn't make that decision. A body of vote watchers did. LaHood didn't make muster as a conservative on anything. Right now, he's promoting a Communist Country, China, which is causing a stink over leaving Syria alone. Syria's hands are not clean on human rights:

Syria is operating detention centers where guards and interrogators torment Syrian prisoners by ripping out their fingernails, burning them with battery acid, inflicting electric shock and other methods of torture, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released Tuesday. “They put staples in my fingers, chest and ears. I was only allowed to take them out if I spoke. The nails in the ears were the most painful,” a 31-year-old detainee told the group last month. Intelligence agents used electric stun guns on his genitals and used a car battery to give him electric shock, he said.
“I thought I would never see my family again,” the detainee told them.
Human Rights Watch said it had documented torture at 27 detention sites across Syria since the uprising against the government began in March 2011, based on interviews with more than 200 witnesses. It named the officials who allegedly run the detention centers, mapped out the sites' locations and provided bleak sketches to illustrate the kinds of torture described by Syrians who had escaped.

Credits: LATimes

LaHood oughta know better. Since he doesn't acknowledge China as anything except what it has always been, someone must hold his feet to the fire he is ignoring in the interest of pleasing his boss.

 

[ladyliberal]

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.

I call him a Republican, just like the voters who elected him seven times with an "R" after his name. You called him a Democrat who was a member of the Democratic party. And as near as I can tell (see, eg, 2005 U.S. House Votes) have ranked Lahood well to the right of center, not 100% liberal as you claim.

I didn't make that decision. A body of vote watchers did. LaHood didn't make muster as a conservative on anything. Right now, he's promoting a Communist Country, China, which is causing a stink over leaving Syria alone. Syria's hands are not clean on human rights:

Syria is operating detention centers where guards and interrogators torment Syrian prisoners by ripping out their fingernails, burning them with battery acid, inflicting electric shock and other methods of torture, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released Tuesday. “They put staples in my fingers, chest and ears. I was only allowed to take them out if I spoke. The nails in the ears were the most painful,” a 31-year-old detainee told the group last month. Intelligence agents used electric stun guns on his genitals and used a car battery to give him electric shock, he said.
“I thought I would never see my family again,” the detainee told them.
Human Rights Watch said it had documented torture at 27 detention sites across Syria since the uprising against the government began in March 2011, based on interviews with more than 200 witnesses. It named the officials who allegedly run the detention centers, mapped out the sites' locations and provided bleak sketches to illustrate the kinds of torture described by Syrians who had escaped.

Credits: LATimes

LaHood oughta know better. Since he doesn't acknowledge China as anything except what it has always been, someone must hold his feet to the fire he is ignoring in the interest of pleasing his boss.

So am I to understand that you are admitting that you were wrong when you said that Lahood was a Democrat, that you were wrong when you said conservative groups gave him a 0% rating, and now you want to discuss Syria's human rights record?

 

[freedombecki]

I call him a Republican, just like the voters who elected him seven times with an "R" after his name. You called him a Democrat who was a member of the Democratic party. And as near as I can tell (see, eg, 2005 U.S. House Votes) have ranked Lahood well to the right of center, not 100% liberal as you claim.

I didn't make that decision. A body of vote watchers did. LaHood didn't make muster as a conservative on anything. Right now, he's promoting a Communist Country, China, which is causing a stink over leaving Syria alone. Syria's hands are not clean on human rights:

Syria is operating detention centers where guards and interrogators torment Syrian prisoners by ripping out their fingernails, burning them with battery acid, inflicting electric shock and other methods of torture, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released Tuesday. “They put staples in my fingers, chest and ears. I was only allowed to take them out if I spoke. The nails in the ears were the most painful,” a 31-year-old detainee told the group last month. Intelligence agents used electric stun guns on his genitals and used a car battery to give him electric shock, he said.
“I thought I would never see my family again,” the detainee told them.
Human Rights Watch said it had documented torture at 27 detention sites across Syria since the uprising against the government began in March 2011, based on interviews with more than 200 witnesses. It named the officials who allegedly run the detention centers, mapped out the sites' locations and provided bleak sketches to illustrate the kinds of torture described by Syrians who had escaped.

Credits: LATimes

LaHood oughta know better. Since he doesn't acknowledge China as anything except what it has always been, someone must hold his feet to the fire he is ignoring in the interest of pleasing his boss.

So am I to understand that you are admitting that you were wrong when you said that Lahood was a Democrat, that you were wrong when you said conservative groups gave him a 0% rating, and now you want to discuss Syria's human rights record?

(1) China is a communist country now and always has been. When they kill people (9 in XianXing lately) and countless dissidents disappear off the face of the earth, that tells me certainly they have not changed that strong central power over other people's life that I dislike from the core of my conservative being.
(2) LaHood is NOT a person I would consider a Republican and he is working right now to support Democrats, which is an indisputable fact.
(3) China supports other human rights abusers, whether liberals wish to acknowledge it or not.
(4) 3 liberals on this board have come here to demand that we think China is not a Communist country in sundry ways of speaking.

It seems you show up when facts we bring to the board are true. I think you are a supervisor.

 

[P@triot]

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 was appointed by Obama. Do you really believe Obama - the radical Marxist who has appointed nut cases like Holder, Rahm Emanual and surrounds himself with radicals like Jeremiah Wright and David Axelrod, would really appoint a true conservative?

Just because you call yourself a "Republican" doesn't mean you're an actual Republican. Ted Bundy called himself an "upstanding citizen" - would you agree with that assessment?