Things That Just Piss Me Off

Anyone who reads this blog can tell I’m against amnesty for illegal immigrants. But immigrants who have served in the armed forces, whether they went to Iraq or not, should be given automatic citizenship. If they can risk their lives to defend this country, they can be citizens. It’s as simple as that. Bush promised but lacks the ethics to follow through on his promises.

After the War, a New Battle to Become Citizens
By FERNANDA SANTOS

Despite a 2002 promise from President Bush to put citizenship applications for immigrant members of the military on a fast track, some are finding themselves waiting months, or even years, because of bureaucratic backlogs.

About 7,200 service members or people who have been recently discharged have citizenship applications pending, but neither the Department of Defense nor Citizenship and Immigration Services keeps track of how long they have been waiting. Immigration lawyers and politicians say they have received a significant number of complaints about delays because of background checks, misplaced paperwork, confusion about deployments and other problems.

Officials have estimated that it will take an average of 18 months to process citizenship applications from legal immigrants through 2010, up from seven months last year. But service members and veterans are supposed to go to the head of the line. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President Bush signed an executive order allowing noncitizens on active duty to file for citizenship right away, instead of having to first complete three years in the military.

Of course bush supporters will say it’s not his fault. He promised it and all, but of course he can’t be held accountable for his shoddy treatment of veterans. Maybe never having been one he just doesn’t get it.

What good is it to say you have tons of experience, if you then show you do not learn from any of your experience. Every time hillary Clinton turns to negative campaign tactics, it backfires on her. Yet she continues to do it.

Debate Takes On Contentious Air
By PATRICK HEALY and JEFF ZELENY

Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama veered from collegial to clenched and combative in a debate on Thursday, with Mrs. Clinton turning especially aggressive as she all but accused Mr. Obama of plagiarism and derided his political message as “change you can Xerox.”

“The notion that I had plagiarized from somebody who’s one of my national co-chairs who gave me the line and suggested that I use it, I think is silly,” he said to applause and laughter.

So once again, she attacks something that means absolutely nothing instead of talking about the issues that concern US Voters. She did it with the slumlord remark in an earlier debate when she accused Obama of working for a chicago slumlord.

Later Fox News displayed a photo taken with that very same slumlord, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton. And Obama never worked directly for that slum lord. He worked for a church that was doing a property deal with that slumlord.

In this latest attack, he was given the lines to use by the author of those lines. That is not plagiarism. If Hillary is a lawyer and wants to be president maybe she should look up plagiarism and see what it is. If I tell you that you can use the content of this blog post somewhere, then you are not engaging in plagiarism by doing so.

She has no facts to go after Obama with so she is just pulling every dirty trick she can. This is a true sign of the fact she is losing and getting desperate. That or she is just that type of person anyway.

Anyone who still says that Bush is not one-sided in favor of big business is just lying to themselves. Once again, he gets his way and big business benefits while people suffer.

Justices Shield Medical Devices From Lawsuits
By LINDA GREENHOUSE

Makers of medical devices like implantable defibrillators or breast implants are immune from liability for personal injuries as long as the Food and Drug Administration approved the device before it was marketed and it meets the agency’s specifications, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.

The 8-to-1 decision was a victory for the Bush administration, which for years has sought broad authority to pre-empt tougher state regulation.

In 2004, the administration reversed longstanding federal policy and began arguing that “premarket approval” of a new medical device by the F.D.A. overrides most claims for damages under state law. Because federal law makes no provision for damage suits against device makers, injured patients have turned to state law and have won substantial awards.

The Bush administration will continue its push for pre-emption in another F.D.A. case that the court has accepted for its next term, on whether the agency’s approval of a drug, as opposed to a device, pre-empts personal injury suits. Drugs and medical devices are regulated under separate laws.

There have been numerous cases where these manufacturers have put shoddy workmanship into their devices and caused people to die. They put their bottom line against the health of the people who have to use them.

These people do not get to choose which brand of device goes into them. That means free market principles, which cause manufacturers to make better products in order to make more sales, does not apply.

All they have to do is pay doctors and hospitals to use their products. They pay these doctors by hiring them as consultants. In return the doctors use their products in their patients. The patient is not asked, “Which brand of defibrillator do you want us to use in case you have a heart attack?

So this law shields the manufacturers from any liability if the FDA approved them before marketing the product. So after the approval, the manufacturer can downgrade how they manufacture the product or how they do quality control and they cannot be sued.

Another victory for Bush. Another victory for Big Business. Another loss for the people that live in this country and have no choice what medical device is implanted into them.

Justices Add Legal Complications to Debate on F.D.A.’s Competence By GARDINER HARRIS

The Institute of Medicine, the Government Accountability Office and the F.D.A.’s own science board have all issued reports concluding that poor management and scientific inadequacies have made the agency incapable of protecting the country against unsafe drugs, medical devices and food. Randall Lutter, the F.D.A.’s deputy commissioner for policy, said that the agency was responding to reports of its deficiencies and improving.

Before President Bush took office, F.D.A. officials said that courts provided patients additional protection. In a 1997 brief, the agency’s chief lawyer wrote that “even the most thorough regulation of a product such as a critical medical device may fail to identify potential problems.”

With Wednesday’s ruling, those efforts proved successful for device makers. Two more cases, one to be argued Monday and the other in October, will determine whether drug makers will benefit as well. In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the F.D.A.’s interpretation of its rules deserves “substantial deference.” Since the administration now interprets those rules to provide similar liability protection to drug makers, Justice Scalia’s opinion suggests that the court may soon provide a liability shield to pharmaceutical companies, too.

Now Bush wants this to apply to drugs that pharmacuetical companies push on us through doctors that they also hire as consultants and give trips and bonuses to for prescibing them.

Bush got congress to approve a law that said that senior citizens cannot negotiate on the price they pay for drugs, now he wants to make sure that when bad drugs are sold by the pharmaceutical companies that kill people, no one can sue them.

I can’t wait to see Bush get out of the white house. it will take years to repair the damage he has done to all of us and to this country.

The Clintons do not care what anyone thinks about them or care about the issues. All they care about is getting elected at any cost. Again she reminds me of George W. Bush. The Bushes and Clintons have run the white house for 20 years now. No more Bushes and no more Clintons.

They both seem to believe they have some sort of entitlement to the white house. Hillary said it early in the campaign when shje assumed no one would dare go against the clinton machine and that she was clearly the frontrunner, etc. etc.

Now that she isn’t the frontrunner and in fact starting to lose, she is pulling every dirty trick in the book. The democratic party said that since florida and michigan moved their primaries up, they would have no delegates. Hillary did not disagree then. Now since those states voted for her, she wants those delegates counted after all.

And you have to love her and bill running around the country saying “look at all we did for you black people, you should vote for us.”

She is a washington insider and the only thing she will change is the curtains in the oval office. Unfortunately, many of the so-called super delegates are also washington insiders and she is counting on the favors they owe her and making them promises. She is also counting on them not wanting anything to change in washington dc as well.

And now check this out;

There’s a new ad in Georgia that shows African-Americans blaming Hispanics for a loss of jobs. “Boy,” I thought, “the Republicans are getting started early.” Then it dawned on me . the Republicans have NOTHING to gain from that ad, BUT Hillary Rodham Clinton certainly does.

Why would the Clintons and their supporters run the ad in a state that already held its primary? Because they know CNN will play the ad…and it’ll be seen in Texas. Seen in Texas? Oh yes, in Texas! Texas, where Obama is beginning to make inroads into the Hispanic vote and in Texas where Clinton NEEDS the Hispanic vote.

See, the Clintons couldn’t continue to send Bill out to do the race-baiting. It backfired every time they did that. But, they certainly could have a wealthy supporter write a check and make an ad