Subject:
|
Re: Stop the madness...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:43:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
304 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
| |
I’d be interested to learn the political leanings of the aforementioned
paralyzed drunkard.
|
Well, either he’s a liberal who genuinely feels he’s been victimized, or a
new liberal who has been convinced (by a shyster who gets 40% off of the
top) that he is owed something somehow.
|
So you’re saying that anyone who seeks compensation for a dumb action that he
himself commits must be a liberal?
I suspect that you’re kidding, because otherwise you’re asserting that no
Conservative has ever sought, will ever seek, or would ever seek compensation
for such an accident. There are plenty of Conservative shysters out there, too.
One Kenneth Starr springs to mind, not to mention John Ashcroft...
| |
| |
After all, we know that Conservatives absolutely adore and
support actions free of consequence.
|
Now, now, not so, Dave! Please don’t sit there and tell me that you are
against tort reform-- it is a problem evident to even a liberal (unless of
course said liberal is a shyster).
|
Well, tort reform also represents a rhetorical problem, insofar as rich
Republicans and corporate apologists have decreed that “$250,000.00 is enough
money for the rabble,” so they lose any moral authority they might otherwise
have claimed on the subject. Additionally, it has not been demonstrated to my
satisfaction that pain-and-suffering suits are as overwhelmingly pervasive as
industry would have us believe, nor that the solution is to slap an arbitrary
pricecap on compensation.
I assert that I’m not inclined to reward idiots who go out of their way to kill
or maim themselves (eg, if you use your lawnmower as a ceiling fan, then you
have no claim to damages when it cuts off the top of your skull). However, if
you want to get rid of costly pain-and-suffering compensation, then you should
simply allow courts to reward infinite punitive damages when a company is
deliberately or culpably negligent or injurious.
But I was in any case referring to such Conservatives as Kennyboy Lay, George W.
Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleezza Rice, and
others. Clearly they consider themselves absolutely immune to the consequences
of their actions.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Stop the madness...
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) And see, that's the line for me. If a corp. is negligent and that negligence harm, then the corp. should be on the hook. If you are in a drunken stupor, and you, in that intoxicated state, (...) (21 years ago, 11-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
| (...) Well, either he's a liberal who genuinely feels he's been victimized, or a new liberal who has been convinced (by a shyster who gets 40% off of the top) that he is owed something somehow. (...) Now, now, not so, Dave! Please don't sit there (...) (21 years ago, 11-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
