Interesting, TJ has gone from potshots, to ad hominem attacks, to juvenile cries and illogical attacks. It's like watching a kid jump into quicksand and try to escape by kicking and flailing.
Yes, please attack this. Edwards has no defense and it will bring the Democrats down with him.. In 1993, a five-year-old girl named Valerie Lakey had been playing in a Wake County, N.C., wading pool when she became caught in an uncovered drain so forcefully that the suction pulled out most of her intestines. She survived but for the rest of her life will need to be hooked up to feeding tubes for 12 hours each night. Edwards filed suit on the Lakeys' behalf against Sta-Rite Industries, the Wisconsin corporation that manufactured the drain. Attorneys describe his handling of the case as a virtuoso example of a trial layer bringing a negligent corporation to heel. Sta-Rite offered the Lakeys $100,000 to settle the case. Edwards passed. Before trial, he discovered that 12 other children had suffered similar injuries from Sta-Rite drains. The company raised its offer to $1.25 million. Two weeks into the trial, they upped the figure to $8.5 million. Edwards declined the offer and asked for their insurance policy limit of $22.5 million. The day before the trial resumed from Christmas break, Sta-Rite countered with $17.5 million. Again, Edwards said no. On January 10, 1997, lawyers from across the state packed the courtroom to hear Edwards' closing argument, "the most impressive legal performance I have ever seen," recalls Dayton. Three days later, the jury found Sta-Rite guilty and liable for $25 million in economic damages (by state law, punitive damages could have tripled that amount). The company immediately settled for $25 million, the largest verdict in state history. For their part, Edwards and Kirby earned the Association of Trial Lawyers of America's national award for public service. (Excerpt from a Washington Monthly article: URL=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html]http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html[/URL] )
the legal system is the ONLY safeguard we have. corporations only understand the bottom line. if you don't believe it, just recall the Ford Pinto, where car designers literally balanced out the cost of lost consumers' lives against the cost of replacement parts. unfreaking believable. i'm not a plaintiff's attorney. but i can't help but recognize the part they play. i'm certainly not saying they're all virtuous...or truthful...but the role itself is a necessary one in our society.
Let's see, the drain is left uncovered and so Edwards holds the company hostage for tens of millions of dollars? Ah yes, makes perfect sense. It was an unintentional mistake, yet you liberals act like the company purposefully manufactured an intestine sucker. Ridiculous. Then $17.5mm isn't enough for Edwards? His greed is truly limitless. It is a shame that so many resources are diverted and thereby wasted in an effort to stave off these modern day money grubbing pirates. This type of crime against the investor class is praised and honored by the out-of-touch liberals who wouldn't know what a financial statement looked like if it hit them in the face. Demogoguery wins the day, as the only thing people will remember is the intestine-less girl, instead of the people who are put out of work, the dollars that are wiped out of 401k plans, the tax revenues which are lost, and the shareholder wealth that is evaporated. When will the liberals recognize that trial lawyers endanger and erode the standard of living and wealth of Americans?
When will the conservatives recognize that greed-driven oilmen endanger and erode the safety of peace-loving people throughout the world?
That's because he and his ilk are scared as hell of Kerry-Edwards, since they can actually put sentences together. I cannot wait for the debates.
I was about to bring up the Pinto myself. Companies must be held accountable for unethical decisions that endanger consumers' lives.
Republicans do scream, SHRILLY, against trial lawyers. I admit that their work can hinder some legitimate business operations (frivolous lawsuits) but after having worked in the business world a little while. I can't say I've met many businesspersons who got into their line of work for humanitarian reasons. Stick it to the consumer? Check. Destroy natural resources and leave pestilential waste in its wake? Check. Go over to Deer Park, Pasadena (East side of Houston) and see how many people (kids especially) that suffer from headaches and nosebleeds from poisons in the air. You think this President has lifted a finger to control emissions? On the contrary. I'm sure that John Edwards' cases haven't always been save-the-world situations (what do you call a thousand lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? a good start. bada-bing) but if there are people out there who can stand up to corporations trying to railroad the little guy, then yeah, I'm all for it. I only wish John Edwards could get his hands on documents from Cheney's energy task force. Too bad. THAT would make for a great debate: "So, basically, the task force gave the green light to gouge consumers etc etc etc?" And then Cheney would give him that "I-can-make-you-disappear-and-not-lose-any-sleep-over-it" look. 'T'would be classic.
Too bad that Edwards is trying to be the VP instead of the President or I might care about this ticket.
First of all, he did try. Second, if Edwards was the nominee I suspect you would say something similar about whoever he picked for VP.
Great choice. Truly the best choice possible. Edwards will be one of the greatest VPs in US history. He is intelligent, affable, warm, kind, humble, honest, generous, engaging, handsome, photogenic, righty, southerner, self made, driven and trusthworthy. A true small people representative - a man for the masses. He is a bright light - a prophet of our political times. He is a pace setter - a God sent. He will charm us and he will be a blessing to America. He will be great senate president - presiding over one of the greatest senate years in US history. He will be the yang to the president's ying. He will light up America with his infectious smile come February 1st 2005.
You know, when a company is faced for the first time with something they had no idea would be a problem, I agree that a large verdict is out-of-line. But what usually gets these companies when they end up on the losing side of a large verdict is that it comes out that there were previous cases that showed their product was dangerous and the company did nothing to fix the problem (and, in many cases, the companies take active steps to hide the problem). In the Sta-Rite case, they only recalled the pumps to add safety new safety devices after the trial brought the potential problems to the public, despite 12 other kids having suffered similar injuries prior to the Lakey lawsuit. At the end of the day, the company's managers are the ones who caused the problems. First by allowing a flawed product on the market in the first place, then by not taking the step toward fixing the problems when they first came to light (and then even continuing that by lowballing with the original settlement offers rather than owning up to the mistake and trying to make things right). With that sort of unwillingness to fix their mistakes, taking it to trial and getting a big verdict (and the attendent press associated with a big verdict) is the only way to get their attention and get them to change. If anyone was put out of work by this, they need to focus their anger on the company's manager who knew there was a problem and did nothing to fix it. There are plenty of cases where I think trial lawyers act too zealously in going after corporations. I don't think this is one of those cases.
The maker knew there were problems and had done nothing to correct it. I'm glad that somebody stepped in when this corporation didn't TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS. I always hear conservatives yelling at people to take responsibility for their actions, but I've seen this administration blame previous administrations, intel communities, 'a few bad apple' soldiers, everyone but themselves. Now I see a company who doesn't take responsibility for their actions either and who defends them? A conservative.
apropos of Kerr, errr, Edwards' 2 america's campaign theme, if Kerry wins, he and his wife will be the richest couple to ever occupy the white house. given John, Jr.'s personal wealth is around $70M, it kinda makes you wonder how much they really believe that stuff...
Not to defend the guy or his ideas, but a person doesn't necessarily have to be a member of a certain segment of society to empathize with them or to find out things about them and draw conclusions. I don't know if he's right or not (since I don't know the whole of his theory), but I don't think any plan to help the poor can be discounted solely because it comes from a wealthy person.
