Things That Just Piss Me Off

McCain’s big plan to embarass Obama about not having visited Iraq to see how the war was going seems to have backfired and made Obame seem even more presidential. All it did was give Obama a chance to look good.

The Boston Globe gave McCain the headline story though and put the story about Obama in Iraq below it, but the imagery was perfect. The top picture was McCain standing with Bush and the picture below that was Obama looking presidential in Iraq.

The message is McCain is no different than Bush while Obama is out there making on-the-ground assessments in Iraq. Great strategy McCain. Dare your opponent to do something that will just end up embarassing you.

And one more question . . . John McCain, what is up with all the blinking? Do you have a disease we are unaware of? I mean who blinks with every single word they say unless there is a medical condition causing it? They say people blink a lot when they are lying. So is it a medical condition you have not revealed or are you blinking because you are lying?

The government loves the phrase, “it’s for the children”. They know how to play on your emotions to get the laws passed that they want passed. They can now invade your privacy, because it’s to protect you from terrorism. They can collect your DNA now without even charging you with a crime to protect you against terrorists.

Now Joseph Biden believes the government should spend a billion dollars to monitor all file sharing traffic on the web. He says it’s because he wants to fight child pornography. And many people will all applaud him for it and say it’s a great idea because as we all know child porn is bad.

This law will also be used to find people who are illegally sharing movies and music. The RIAA and the movie industry lobby congress. They want to monitor all file sharing. And now people will let them do it because Joseph Biden says, “it’s for the children.”

A prominent Senate Democrat on Wednesday said federal and local police should use custom software to monitor peer-to-peer networks for illegal activity, and he wants to spend $1 billion in tax dollars to help make that happen.

At an afternoon Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing about child exploitation on the Internet, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) said he was under the impression it’s “pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting or downloading violent scenes of rape, molestation” simply by looking at file names. He urged use of those techniques by investigators to help nab the most egregious offenders.

Based on Waters’ statements to the committee, the system appears to work like this: Investigators log onto peer-to-peer file-sharing networks as any other person would and search for files containing certain keywords that are likely to indicate child pornography is involved. Then they download the files–frequently videos, sometimes as long as 20 to 30 minutes, with names like “children kiddy underage illegal.mpg” and much more obscene–to their own machines. They’re able to use the Fairplay software to obtain the IP address of the file’s sender and, in some cases, display its geographic location in map form.

Once armed with an IP address and date and time of the download, investigators can subpoena the Internet service provider for more information, such as name and address of the subscriber who was assigned it at that moment. “It’s not necessarily the suspect but it tells us the physical location to start,” Waters said. (He didn’t say whether any wiretaps were conducted to monitor ongoing file swapping.)

And since it is also illegal to share movies and music, as soon as this law is passed the movie and music industry will push and get it adopted for that as well. Watch and see.

This is typical of an administration that is friendly to big business and uncaring about the general public. Consumers are supposed to trust the government agencies in charge of prosecuting crime, whether the crime is perpetrated by individuals or corporations.

After Enron, the oversight and enforcement of corporate fraud should have tightened up. But instead, big business got george bush elected and the reverse has happened.

In Justice Shift, Corporate Deals Replace Trials
In Justice Shift, Corporate Deals Replace Trials
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: April 9, 2008

In 2005, federal authorities concluded that a Monsanto consultant had visited the home of an Indonesian official and, with the approval of a senior company executive, handed over an envelope stuffed with hundred-dollar bills. The money was meant as a bribe to win looser environmental regulations for Monsanto’s cotton crops, according to a court document. Monsanto was also caught concealing the bribe with fake invoices.

A few years earlier, in the age of Enron, these kinds of charges would probably have resulted in a criminal indictment. Instead, Monsanto was allowed to pay $1 million and avoid criminal prosecution by entering into a monitoring agreement with the Justice Department.

In a major shift of policy, the Justice Department, once known for taking down giant corporations, including the accounting firm Arthur Andersen, has put off prosecuting more than 50 companies suspected of wrongdoing over the last three years.

Instead, many companies, from boutique outfits to immense corporations like American Express, have avoided the cost and stigma of defending themselves against criminal charges with a so-called deferred prosecution agreement, which allows the government to collect fines and appoint an outside monitor to impose internal reforms without going through a trial. In many cases, the name of the monitor and the details of the agreement are kept secret.

Letting crimes committed by corporations go on with a slap on the wrist and a fine is just wrong. Anyone should be able to see that. These corporations can pay the million-dollar fine easily when they just made millions by committing fraud. This just insures that the government also profits from their crime.

That makes our government their partner in crime. The motto seems to be, “Go ahead, commit fraud, steal money, just make sure we get our cut.

This is what we could reasonably expect if george bush were elected to a third term in office. I just hope it doesn’t happen near the end of his second term.

LOL. I love it. Hillary Clinton is always trying to make it appear as if she has real experience and doesn’t mind embellishing or making it up either.

Hillary Clinton has finally admitted that she “misspoke” when claiming that she came “under sniper fire” in Bosnia during a March 1996 visit to U.S. troops enforcing the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. At first, the Clinton campaign maintained that the “misstatement” was limited to one occasion on March 17 when she talked about running across the tarmac “with our heads down.” In an interview yesterday with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the senator from New York attributed the mistake to her “sleep-deprived” condition.

Misspoke. LOL. Lied.

A review of the record shows that she provided embellished stories of her visit to Bosnia on at least two previous occasions, while campaigning in Iowa in December and in Texas in February.

Ooops! You mean they record that stuff?

After CBS News video showed what really happened when she landed and greeted officials, Senator Clinton maintained there were risks but explained to the Philadelphia Daily News why she was seen on the Bosnia tarmac greeting a young child if it was really so dangerous.

“I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this eight-year-old girl and I said, ‘Well, I, I can’t, I can’t rush by her, I’ve got to at least greet her,” Clinton said. “So I greeted her, I took her stuff and I left. Now that’s my memory of it.”

Aww, so sweet that she remembers stopping on the tarmac just for a minute to greet a little girl while she was under sniper fire!

Once again her memory doesn’t match CBS News videotape, Attkisson reports. She and her daughter Chelsea lingered on the tarmac to greet U.S. military officials, took photos, and then walked to the armored vehicle where she did, eventually, duck and enter…. - CBS News

OOPS! Damn don’t you just hate it when you are proven once again to be lying about your actual experience Hillary? But after all, you are Hillary Clinton. Who are these people to dispute what you say even if they have proof.

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

The media seems to want Hillary Clinton to succeed at any cost. They keep slanting things in such a way as to make it appear that she is winning the race for the democratic nomination. They talk about Nevada as if she won there. They talk about her win in New Hampshire, the famous crying for the vote scene.

It’s not true. She is not winning this race and everyone should be happy about that. People that want things to stay the way they are in Washington want Hillary Clinton to win. For 20 years two families have controlled the white house. The bushes and the clintons.

It’s time for a change. No more bushes and no more clintons! They haven’t made any positive changes in washington in 20 years, we don’t need more of these two families in power.

Back to who is winning the race for the democratic nomination. Here are the facts;

1. Obama has received more overall votes than Hillary Clinton.

2. Obama won more delegates than Hillary Clinton in Nevada.

3. Obama has won more delegates than Hillary Clinton.

Yet the media and Hillary Clinton keep slanting things to make it appear she is winning or that they are tied, etc. They want to influence people to vote for Hillary Clinton by making her look like a winner. And still Obama keeps beating her.

McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and Clinton all represent business as usual in Washington. If we are ever going to change things, we have to change the way we normally vote and get some new blood in the whitehouse. We need to do it now before it’s too late to change things.

Obama and Ron Paul represent change in Washington. They want to actually represent the people of this country. So if you are republican and want change vote for Ron Paul. If you are a democrat, vote for Barack Obama. Either way we all win and change can happen.

Don’t fear change! Embrace it! It’s been too long since any real changes happened in Washington. Reagan made changes. JFK made changes. Let’s send the bushes and the clintons packing!