or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Tucker Carlson: Scumbag
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tucker Carlson: Scumbag

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
We have at this point probably all seen Tim Grieve's superb story for Salon outlining the story of John Edwards, trial attorney, and one of his clients. _The most obviously pertinent part, for me, is the opening, an introduction to Valerie Lakey and her family.

Quote:
On a summer evening in 1993, David Lakey took his little girl swimming at a recreation center in Raleigh, N.C. Valerie Lakey was 5 years old, a good swimmer, and she and her friends liked to splash around in the children's wading pool that stayed open a little later than the big pool where they usually swam.

That's what Valerie was doing when a nearby mom heard her call out for help. Valerie was sitting on the bottom of the shallow pool, and the suction from the drain was holding her down. David Lakey raced to free his daughter but couldn't. Other parents jumped in the water to help, but they couldn't get Valerie loose. Valerie was scared, and she began to say that her stomach hurt.

Time passed, and somebody figured out how to turn off the pool's pump. The suction broke, and Valerie was released from its grip. But as David Lakey pulled his daughter from the water, blood and tissue filled the pool. Valerie's intestines had been sucked out.

David Lakey slumped to the ground on the side of the pool. He held his daughter on his chest, praying as they waited for an ambulance. Over and over, he told Valerie, "Daddy loves you. Daddy loves you. Daddy loves you."

First off, if the story of a five year old being pinned down and mechanically disembowled in a public wading pool while her father watched doesn't make you immediately both sick and furious, you're probably not a parent.

Unless, of course, you're Tucker Carlson.

Quote:
Tucker Carlson has heard about Valerie's case. It's the one, apparently, that causes him to dismiss John Edwards as a "personal-injury lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases."

Umm... eew. _Upon reading this, I was sure, or at least hoping, that there was a missing piece here. _Did he really mean this case? _Is this the sort of case that makes him dismiss John Edwards as greedy trial lawyer?

Yep. _Indeed it is.

Quote:
And there's Tucker Carlson again, this time on a "Crossfire" episode last week: "My question is a very, very simple one. And I just want your honest answer. If [Edwards] is out to protect the weak, say, a little girl who was injured, terribly injured, in this Jacuzzi accident, why is it compassionate for him to take tens of millions of dollars of her settlement? Why doesn't he give that money back if he cares for the little girl?"

Yes, it would appear that this is indeed the case he's talking about. _The "Jacuzzi accident."

working as designed, and what-the-hell-is-your-problem-you-goddamn-communist-for-questioning-us. _The suction is supposed to be strong enough to pin children to the bottom of pools and perhaps suck out their intestines, apparently, so no harm, no foul. _Or maybe it's the children's fault for being so goddamn stupid as to play in a pool equipped with this particular company's products. _The precise defense of the company is never clearly described to me. _Or maybe, since I'm not a Republican, I just don't get it.

This case, more than any other taken on by John Edwards, trial lawyer, has the entire Republican establishment up in arms. _And none more so than Tucker Carlson, CNN's resident sack of shit. _Minus the sack. _Tucker has been working the Jacuzzi case angle, harping on this one particular case, for at least two full years.

This case is the one that infuriates Republicans. _This case, of a little girl being mechanically -- no, sorry, hydraulically disemboweled while playing in a public wading pool. _For this, John Edwards is, according to Ari Fleischer, an "ambulance chaser". _For this, John Edwards is, according to Dick Armey, part of a "well-connected swarm of trial lawyers who twist our legal system to pillage the productive sector for personal gain."

Note to Dick Armey: _Stay away from my fucking kid, pal.

Here is the first example I have been able to find of Tucker Carlson specifically pushing the "Jacuzzi case" talking point.

Quote:
June 4, 2002

BEGALA: _Yes, sir?

ADAM SHAPIRO [caller]: Hi, this Adam Shapiro (ph) from Washington, D.C. And a question for you, Tucker. Aren't conservatives like you really afraid of Senator John Edwards of North Carolina because he is so popular with moderates, especially in the South?

CARLSON: In a word, no, Adam. This is a man who's been in politics less than four years. Before that, he was a personal injury lawyer, specializing in jacuzzi cases. Marvelous guy. Excellent manners. Very likable. That does not add up to a presidential profile.

So, there is is. _June 4th, 2002. _By that date, someone, somewhere, told Tucker Carlson that John Edwards specialized in "Jacuzzi cases." _And Tucker, being ever-agreeable to digesting good ol' fashioned talking points, runs with it.

Now, any defense of Carlson would probably have to rely on some notion that he didn't really know what he was talking about. _That he was repeating the phrase, and didn't know what the case really entailed. _After all, he said "Jacuzzi"... the actual John Edwards case involved a little girl being disemboweled in a shallow (public) wading pool. _Could he just be a tool, an empty mouth?

just be a tool, an empty mouth?

Quote:
January 1, 2003

W/ Bob Shrum, Democratic Strategist

CARLSON: One of the leading candidates among the Democrats in 2004 is John Edwards. Smart guy, decent guy, articulate guy, doesn't have the resume in the current environment in politics, but four years [ago] he was a personal-injury lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases. That's not going to cut it in this environment, is it?

SHRUM: Well, first of all, he never did a case like that. And if you, by Jacuzzi, mean a young woman who had her insides sucked out by a defective pool drain, who has to for the rest of her life receive 24-hour-a-day care, and that he took that case and won that case, if that's what you're referring to, I think people in this country would like that.

CARLSON: And so you're saying -- just to make sure I understand you -- that that is the resume that he's going to run on for commander in chief in 2004?

SHRUM: No, of course not. No, I just have to correct the outrageous misstatement that you just made. _First of all, he hasn't decided whether he's running or not, number one. Number two ... he didn't do class-action cases. He defended very, very powerless people against very powerful interests for 20 years.

CARLSON: And made millions.

(...)

CARVILLE: What experience did [Bush] have, Tucker, that John Edwards didn't? You've attacked John Edwards viciously. Tell us what [Bush] had.

SHRUM: You took what was a really terrible tragedy, in which he did exactly the right thing, and tried to turn it into a joke. You ought to be spanked for that.

CARVILLE: They don't believe that babies sucked into swimming pools ought to have lawyers. That's the difference.

CARLSON: James, lighten up. Lighten up.

Ahem. _Holy. _****ing. _****.

Yeah, James, lighten up. _After all, if you can't laugh about someone's five-year-old daughter getting her intestines sucked out in a public wading pool, what can you laugh about?

Well, so now we know Tucker knows the real story, at least of this date. _At least of this date, Tucker Carlson knows that it was a public wading pool, not a Jacuzzi. _He knows it was a little girl. _He knows the case he's talking about

Quote:
Februrary 11, 2003

CARLSON: When the Al Gore for president campaign, you must remember that, when it first began to unravel back in 2000, Gore decided to move his staff and headquarters out of Washington to Nashville. The idea being if we go to Tennessee, people will think you're authentic. Voters aren't so easily fooled it turns out.

_But don't tell John Edwards that. The Edwards presidential campaign hasn't completely collapsed yet, and already Edwards is pretending he's just another down home southern guy. According to this mornings "Washington Post," the Edwards campaign has rigged its phone system to make it appear that the staff is working out of North Carolina. Most Edwards aides are, in fact, safely inside the Beltway, of course. But to reach them on the phone, you must dial not 202 for Washington, but 919 for Raleigh. Pretty tricky. Now all Edwards needs is some way to disguise the fact that he used to be a trial lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases.

_BEGALA: Let me tell you about one those. One of those cases, in fact the one I think you may be referring to, the one he's most famous for, was a 5-year-old girl named Valerie Lakki (ph). She was caught in the drainage of a pool, she was disemboweled for the rest of her life. She has to go through 12 hours on a feeding tube. John Edwards sued the corporate ******** that should have protect her. God bless John Edwards for doing that. If that's the kind of advocacy he'll take the presidency. He'll be a **** good president

_CARLSON: He got rich from that little girl's suffering. He ought to be embarrassed about it.

_(CROSSTALK)

_BEGALA: There were 13 other example, that corporation knew about little kids being damaged by their product, they did nothing to protect them and thank god we have some people that are willing to protect us.

_(CROSSTALK)

_CARLSON: And getting rich in the meantime, good work, I love that.

_BEGALA: Opposed to Dick Cheney got rich selling oil field equipment to Saddam Hussein. All of a sudden Tucker going to criticize who people earn a living.

As of this date, February 11th of 2003, not only does Tucker Carlson know the little girl and the circumstances of her case, but he knows that the product involved had previously injured other children, and did nothing about it.

He doesn't have a problem with that. _But he does have a problem with John Edwards "getting rich" by taking that small girl's case.

And he doesn't give a ****.

Quote:
September 8, 2003

_CARLSON: As future historians may point out, the political career of John Edwards lasted fewer than six years. Elected to the Senate in 1998 after a lucrative career as a trial lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases, Edwards probably could have spent another couple of decades on Capitol Hill, giving regular press conferences, invoking cloture from time to time, brushing up on his senatorial image.

_But then hubris intervened. Every senator famously thinks he can be president. Edwards really thought it, so he ran. Today, Edwards announced that he will not stand for reelection in North Carolina. Instead, he will devote all of his considerable energies to securing the Democratic nomination. The only problem? Edwards is not likely to get the nomination. And he's even less likely -- far less likely -- to become the president of the United States. His relatively safe Senate seat in North Carolina, meanwhile, will probably go to a Republican. And at result, the GOP strengthens its Senate majority, Edwards goes back to suing people for a living. If it weren't so amusing, it might be a shame.

_(LAUGHTER)

_(APPLAUSE)

_BEGALA: This is one of my favorite kind of stereotypes of the elite right that you play into. And that is that somehow representing people against corporations who make products that kill their children is dishonorable.

_Which is more honorable, to sue a company that makes a product that kills children or to sell oil field equipment to Saddam Hussein, which is what Dick Cheney did when George Bush picked him to be on the ticket? I'll take the trial lawyers every day of the week.

_(BELL RINGING)

_CARLSON: I would love to take that seriously, but it makes so little sense, I can't.

_BEGALA: Which is more honorable? It's a simple choice, Tucker.

_CARLSON: All I can say is, suing people actually makes America a much less happy, friendly place.

And he does it again...

Quote:
November 26, 2003

w/ Dennis Kucinich, Presidential Candidate

_CARLSON: Well, if you're not an obscenely rich trial lawyer, chances are you probably have not given a dime to the John-Edwards-for-president campaign and you probably don't plan to. Well, Senator Edwards would like to change that, of course, which is why he's begun offering a copy of his autobiography to anyone who gives him $35 or more. The plan will help fund his doomed bid for the White House and move a few copies of his book, which is entitled "Four Trials" -- two birds, one stone.

_The Edwards campaign also hopes the book will explain why a former trial lawyer who, until just a very few years ago, was trying Jacuzzi cases, ought to be the president of the United States. As his spokeswoman admitted to "The New York Times" this morning -- quote -- "People don't necessarily understand how his career translates to the presidency."

_That's for certain, not that Edwards necessarily had much to do with his own book. According to his campaign, of the $150,000 Edwards received from Simon & Schuster, his publisher, $135,000 of that went to researchers and ghost writers.

_BEGALA: Now...

_CARLSON: The guy doesn't even pretend to write his own book.

_(APPLAUSE)

_(CROSSTALK)

_CARLSON: It's embarrassing.

_BEGALA: Jacuzzi cases you say? That case a little girl who...

_CARLSON: There were a couple cases.

_BEGALA: Excuse me. Let me -- let me finish. This is important. A little girl had her intestines sucked out by a pool that the manufacturer could have prevented with a $1 part. John Edwards stood up to a big corporation. Republicans support the big corporations.

_CARLSON: Stood up. Paul, Paul...

_BEGALA: Edwards supported that family whose little girl was devastated by that product.

_(BELL RINGING)

_BEGALA: God bless John Edwards, God bless trial lawyers for standing up to corporate America.

_(CROSSTALK)

_(APPLAUSE)

_CARLSON: Do you really think you're convincing anybody when you say, Republicans are for the company that kills the little girls? That's...

_BEGALA: Of course they are.

_CARLSON: That's not an argument. That's a bumper sticker.

_BEGALA: Of course they are.

_CARLSON: And you don't convince anybody.

_BEGALA: Tucker, they're trying to take away all of our rights to stand up to any kind of corporate power. That's what Republicans are all about, sucking up to corporate power.

_(APPLAUSE)

_CARLSON: That's so overstated, it's insane. Nobody believes a word you say.

Actually, Tucker, some of us do. _Because this case, of all the cases John Edwards took, is the one that apparently infuriates you. _This case, this "Jacuzzi case", suing a pool drain manufacturer, is, as we have been told by you for over a year at this point, is an unforgivable act of greed.

Quote:
February 20, 2004

_CARLSON: Well, how do you hit a home run in New York if you're running for president? We'll show you one candidate's swing for the fences next.

_(APPLAUSE)

_(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

_CARLSON: Alex Rodriguez is a baseball player, American league MVP, and now a member of the New York Yankees. John Edwards is a former trial lawyer, specializing in Jacuzzi cases and a soon-to-be former U.S. senator from North Carolina.

_They have nothing in common, right? Well maybe not.

_(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

_SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Thank you all for being here. The folks who work for me here told me that the people of New York were excited about having a new, fresh face from the South here in New York City. But, unfortunately, they were talking about Alex Rodriguez, not me.

_(LAUGHTER)

_(END VIDEO CLIP)

_CARLSON: You know, anybody who tells a good joke, I'm on their side. I'm not sure I'd vote for John Edwards, but good for him.

_CARVILLE: He's a good man.

But it keeps coming.

Quote:
July 5, 2004

_CARLSON: Your point is fair. That's why I want to go to quote that's, I don't know, just about two weeks old. This Chris Heinz, he's Kerry's stepson and an adviser to the campaign. This is what he told "The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" on June 17. Quote: "I was very pro-Edwards in the spring, but now I think we need someone with stronger credentials on foreign policy.

_In other words, the guy is a lightweight. He was a trial lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases just six years ago, and now wants do be vice president.

_LEWIS: Let me be very clear. One, that Jacuzzi case that you're making a joke of is a child who was tragically harmed.

_CARLSON: Oh, I know, I've heard that, yes.

_LEWIS: And John Edwards went into court and got some compensation for the parents and the child. That was a great...

_CARLSON: And for himself, yes.

_LEWIS: So let's just (UNINTELLIGIBLE) fact there for a lot of Americans, keeping that quote...

_CARLSON: Well, let's address Chris Heinz's quote here.

Tucker Carlson. _Republican.

Edited by Fran441: Please do not try and circumvent the profanity filters.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #2 of 29
Outrageous. And not surprising at all. The talking heads existing to perpetuate themselves -- everything else (truth, nuanced representation) is secondary, or in the case of this schmuck, irrelevant.
post #3 of 29
Not to get off topic but how does one's intestines get sucked out by a pool drain? Must be one mother of a drain, probably a bit too much suction for a kiddie pool, or any pool for that matter. As much as I hate John Edwards, it sounds like that one wasn't a stupid lawsuit.
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #4 of 29
Think about it. I'm sure you can figure it out.
post #5 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by G4Dude
Not to get off topic but how does one's intestines get sucked out by a pool drain? Must be one mother of a drain, probably a bit too much suction for a kiddie pool, or any pool for that matter. As much as I hate John Edwards, it sounds like that one wasn't a stupid lawsuit.

So, why do you hate Edwards?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #6 of 29
Perhaps instead of complaining that Tucker Carlson sound heartless, you should complain about the format of the show, Crossfire which leads to the only two views, yell at each other until the bell rings, type of dialog that you read here? I'm sure ample examples could be provided for both sides. James Carville isn't exactly known for his tact. I'm sure that is why both were hired for the show.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #7 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Perhaps instead of complaining that Tucker Carlson sound heartless, you should complain about the format of the show, Crossfire which leads to the only two views, yell at each other until the bell rings, type of dialog that you read here? I'm sure ample examples could be provided for both sides. James Carville isn't exactly known for his tact. I'm sure that is why both were hired for the show.

Nick

Typical reactionary rightwing response.

Ignore the topic completely and say "oh yeah, well my guy's not so bad, cause look at what your guy did".

Just like so many threads that start out about something that BUSH did, end up trying to "defend" Bush by attacking Clinton.

Talk about intellectually bankrupt....
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #8 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Typical reactionary rightwing response.

Ignore the topic completely and say "oh yeah, well my guy's not so bad, cause look at what your guy did".

Just like so many threads that start out about something that BUSH did, end up trying to "defend" Bush by attacking Clinton.

Talk about intellectually bankrupt....

The complaint is that Tucker Carlson took the work Edwards did and reduced it down to trial lawyer specializing in jacuzzi cases. I mentioned that the format itself might be part of what contributes to that type of phrasing. Look at all the transcripts, none of them reflect any sort of deep views. It is basically just a verbal boxing match which is exactly the format of Crossfire.

Here are some of the "enlightened" responses from the Democratic side.

Quote:
BEGALA: Opposed to Dick Cheney got rich selling oil field equipment to Saddam Hussein. All of a sudden Tucker going to criticize who people earn a living

Wow, deep.

And this...

Quote:
SHRUM: You took what was a really terrible tragedy, in which he did exactly the right thing, and tried to turn it into a joke. You ought to be spanked for that.

CARVILLE: They don't believe that babies sucked into swimming pools ought to have lawyers. That's the difference.

Wow, Carlson needs... a spanking. Carville has to take the same tragedy that is explained in a couple paragraphs by North and reduce it to babies being sucked into pools. Is that any more enlightened or less callous? Should I be pissed off because he didn't have time to say that they really need assistance, help, compensation, justice and so forth instead of....lawyers?

That is the format of the show so if you don't like the type of quips it generates disparage the show because it leads to nothing but sound bite attacks from everyone at the expense of real discussion and thinking.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Carville has to take the same tragedy that is explained in a couple paragraphs by North and reduce it to babies being sucked into pools. Is that any more enlightened or less callous?

As compared to calling it a "jacuzzi case", I think it's a bit more enlightened, and a helluva lot more accurate. I can't disagree with you on the highly charged atmosphere of the show and its format, but I think you'll need some better examples to paint the show's Dems as being equally scummy as Carlson.
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #10 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
As compared to calling it a "jacuzzi case", I think it's a bit more enlightened, and a helluva lot more accurate. I can't disagree with you on the highly charged atmosphere of the show and its format, but I think you'll need some better examples to paint the show's Dems as being equally scummy as Carlson.

You mean something like treating sexual harassment and women like this?

Quote:
"Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll find."
James Carville (on Paula Jones sexual harassment allegation against Bill Clinton)

or how about this one since maybe from the left to the left...

Quote:
"[Howard Dean] seems to not appreciate the glory of the unspoken thought...I'm scared to death that this guy just says anything. It feels like he's undergone some kind of a political lobotomy here." -- Democratic party strategist and advisor, James Carville on CNN's "Crossfire" program.

Pretty scummy... Did anything Dean do really deserve to be equated with a lobotomy? Does a woman who was harassed really deserve the comment above?

But of course all these replies do is validate that you would rather show that your guys are less scummy, rather than the format being responsible for this type of nonsense.

I mean we all hate that type of tactic right?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #11 of 29
Good argument, Trumpt. That's the kind of example that backs up your statement, and it does it well. I agree with your basic premise here, but that doen't mean Carlson isn't scum.

I think the moral of this thread is that if you don't like it, don't watch it, but personally, it sounds as though Carlson is just making himself look like an ass, even to conservatives, who will be better informed and more compassionate about the "jacuzzi" thing and won't think the joke is funny. In my opinion, this will lead to a dilution of the entire "trial lawyer" argument, which will actually benefit Kerry/Edwards in the long run. Not that the argument wasn't a weak grasp at straws to begin with.
post #12 of 29
I always pictured Tucker to be a bed wetter.
post #13 of 29
If you're actually able to mentally equate those statements with calling a drain disembowling a five year old in a public wading pool while her father watched "a Jacuzzi Case", then I don't think there's any point in continuing this particular discussion.

It's more than just partisan spin, more than just dishonesty, it's extremely disrespectful (bordering on hurtful and cruel) to the Lakey family. If I was David Lakey and I had on opportunity to discuss this with Carlson in person, I'd have much more to say than just "scumbag".
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #14 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Good argument, Trumpt. That's the kind of example that backs up your statement, and it does it well. I agree with your basic premise here, but that doen't mean Carlson isn't scum.

I think the moral of this thread is that if you don't like it, don't watch it, but personally, it sounds as though Carlson is just making himself look like an ass, even to conservatives, who will be better informed and more compassionate about the "jacuzzi" thing and won't think the joke is funny. In my opinion, this will lead to a dilution of the entire "trial lawyer" argument, which will actually benefit Kerry/Edwards in the long run. Not that the argument wasn't a weak grasp at straws to begin with.

Exactly. The NeoCons are beating the trial lawyer war drums but in this instance Edwards has a good (as in honest and moraly sound) case to ride. This isn't the issue the noecons should be focusing on because it will bite them in the long run when the full and true story is plasted across the media and not just from the filthy mouths of Carleson and Limbaugh.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #15 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
If you're actually able to mentally equate those statements with calling a drain disembowling a five year old in a public wading pool while her father watched "a Jacuzzi Case", then I don't think there's any point in continuing this particular discussion.

It's more than just partisan spin, more than just dishonesty, it's extremely disrespectful (bordering on hurtful and cruel) to the Lakey family. If I was David Lakey and I had on opportunity to discuss this with Carlson in person, I'd have much more to say than just "scumbag".

Politics is a dirty game. The neocons are struggling thus they have to pull out the dirty campaign early in the season (which never ever bodes well for the smearer or the smearie). As I've said in other threads (and backed my claims so I'm not gonna do it again) Bush doesn't have much to run on so he (and the neocon tribe) is using an ugly campaign. These Noecons have said some reprehensible things in the past so why do you find this so much more shocking?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #16 of 29
I've never seen teh show, but it sounds like Trumptman is right that th eformat is really somethng to be despised.

But, with that said, the tac taken by Carlson is truly repugnant, even in this WWF-of-political debate arena . . . and it would be bad even if it only stayed there, but, I know that it is rippling all over the main middle/right media . . . its a 'talking point' and its a stupid sleazy attempt to smear his character . . .

. . luckily, the only people who care about the 'trial lawyer' tag as a real liability are those already voting for Bush.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #17 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
If you're actually able to mentally equate those statements with calling a drain disembowling a five year old in a public wading pool while her father watched "a Jacuzzi Case", then I don't think there's any point in continuing this particular discussion.

It's more than just partisan spin, more than just dishonesty, it's extremely disrespectful (bordering on hurtful and cruel) to the Lakey family. If I was David Lakey and I had on opportunity to discuss this with Carlson in person, I'd have much more to say than just "scumbag".

Why don't you go to the little girl and ask her which she prefer, having her case called a Jacuzzi case or perhaps the 8+ million dollars Edwards took from her for winning the case.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, Edwards won judgments totaling more than $152 million in 63 lawsuits. The cases are taken on contingency-fee basis which means nothing if they lose, but about 30+% of the award if they win. When you look at the pattern do you see lots of help for the little guy? Do you see an Edwards that got $10,000 for the guy that was only offered $1000? I see the guy that ignored the small guy, the small cases and only went after the huge paydays. It looks like Edwards wouldn't even take a case that would offer an award of less than about a million dollars. The average award is almost 2.5 million.

You want to talk about greedy corporations. What about the other 12 children that Edwards discovered had been harmed by this drain? Did John go help them? Did he give his eight million that he didn't even need (by then his earnings from awards alone were already at 40 million+) to help them? Did he do anything for them? I wonder if he let them live in one of his three homes that are worth over a million dollars?

Then we go to Opensecrets.org and do a little search.

Notice a trend?

Well maybe that is just John Edwards the candidate. Maybe his PAC is a little better rounded. So we look there.

Hmmmmm... same trend.

Yeah, I think the others are right. It is just all made up Neocon bullshit.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Why don't you go to the little girl and ask her which she prefer, having her case called a Jacuzzi case or perhaps the 8+ million dollars Edwards took from her for winning the case.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, Edwards won judgments totaling more than $152 million in 63 lawsuits. The cases are taken on contingency-fee basis which means nothing if they lose, but about 30+% of the award if they win. When you look at the pattern do you see lots of help for the little guy? Do you see an Edwards that got $10,000 for the guy that was only offered $1000? I see the guy that ignored the small guy, the small cases and only went after the huge paydays. It looks like Edwards wouldn't even take a case that would offer an award of less than about a million dollars. The average award is almost 2.5 million.

You want to talk about greedy corporations. What about the other 12 children that Edwards discovered had been harmed by this drain? Did John go help them? Did he give his eight million that he didn't even need (by then his earnings from awards alone were already at 40 million+) to help them? Did he do anything for them? I wonder if he let them live in one of his three homes that are worth over a million dollars?

Then we go to Opensecrets.org and do a little search.

Notice a trend?

Well maybe that is just John Edwards the candidate. Maybe his PAC is a little better rounded. So we look there.

Hmmmmm... same trend.

Yeah, I think the others are right. It is just all made up Neocon bullshit.

Nick

Yeah, fuck that little girl, nobody should have taken her case cause trial lawyers are the devil.

That way, she would have gotten nothing at all and the company would still be making a defective product.

Why are all the conservative posters on this board so.... well, nevermind.

You can't spare a little indignation that a company could be that callous? You can't be a little put off by Tucker's ugly reduction of the case?

I guess you are contemptuous of neurosurgeons, cause they specialized in a lucrative branch of medicine, when they should have been treating colds.

And highly compensated CEOs, who couldn't be bothered to work in the mailroom.

And wealthy professional athletes, who clearly "loved the game" would be toiling in the minor leagues.

So John Edwards elected to go into a lucrative profession (you're all for that, right, the American system that rewards smart choices and punishes those lazy poor people?) which also actually does some good in the world, and you're suddenly a socialist?

You're saying that people who get rich doing what they do are inherently scum-bags. This is quite a turn for you, Nick.

i trust you will come out as supporting a massively redistributive tax structure so that we can wrest this blood money out of the hands of these sleaze bags. Perhaps we could also institute a system of pro-bono labor from previously "obscenely" compensated professions.

Unless, of course, you only mean trial lawyers. But that would be so transparently cynical and partisan, since it would require to knowingly be an enormous hypocrite.

So... welcome aboard the collective express! No more multi-millionaires! No more fat cats getting rich off the backs of the working man! Triple the capital gains tax and full steam ahead.

I'm proud of you, Nick!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Unless, of course, you only mean trial lawyers. But that would be so transparently cynical and partisan, since it would require to knowingly be an enormous hypocrite.

Yes, and of course, there's no such thing as
Republican
Trial
Lawyers
even though their own poll shows over one-fourth of the ATLA members are Republicans.

I'm sure none of them work on contingency fees, though, right?
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #20 of 29
Damn those jacuzzi case trial lawyers. Everybody in da tub gettin' tipsy!
post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Yeah, fuck that little girl, nobody should have taken her case cause trial lawyers are the devil.

That way, she would have gotten nothing at all and the company would still be making a defective product.

Why are all the conservative posters on this board so.... well, nevermind.

There's a lot of space between not taking the case and taking it for a 30-40% contingency. Edwards could have done it for a flat fee and likely still made more than others do in a lifetime. (say 2 million) He could have reduced his own fee since he managed the largest award ever in that state.

Quote:
You can't spare a little indignation that a company could be that callous? You can't be a little put off by Tucker's ugly reduction of the case?

I never spoke in support of the company. To be fair they attempt to still settle for millions before the case was decided. Edwards wouldn't take less than their insurance maximum 22.8 million. They had still offered up I believe it was 14 million before that. 14 million doesn't strike me as too callous. I mean John Edwards took 8+ from the same girl.

Quote:
I guess you are contemptuous of neurosurgeons, cause they specialized in a lucrative branch of medicine, when they should have been treating colds.

And highly compensated CEOs, who couldn't be bothered to work in the mailroom.

And wealthy professional athletes, who clearly "loved the game" would be toiling in the minor leagues.

Actually I'm just exposing how you give guys like Edwards a pass. Are you telling me you don't support socializing some aspects of health care? Are you saying that you support what these doctors make? If that is the case then at least you are consistant with regard to Edwards.

Are you saying that corporate CEO's and wealthy professional atheletes, often playing in publicly financed stadiums are all good and well with you? You believe them all to have good intent and to be working for the little guy while reaping their millions.

The point is that all three examples would likely be personified as not having the interests of anyone at heart. My point is that neither do most personal injury lawyers. Edwards was not looking out for the little guy. He took the cases with the big checks and somehow is excused from the same motivations as the three you listed above. You would call all three greedy and self-interested. Will you call John Edwards the same thing?

Quote:
So John Edwards elected to go into a lucrative profession (you're all for that, right, the American system that rewards smart choices and punishes those lazy poor people?) which also actually does some good in the world, and you're suddenly a socialist?

You're saying that people who get rich doing what they do are inherently scum-bags. This is quite a turn for you, Nick.

I'm saying that you had better give the same actions the same motivations among all people. Don't tell me that CEO's, Haliburton Cheney, and others are all evil because of their greedy intent and then tell me the guy who has three million dollar homes and his partner who's wife has a billion dollars in corporate interests are somehow for the small guy. That their motivations are above suspicion. That their heart is in the right place because you like their politics.

Quote:
i trust you will come out as supporting a massively redistributive tax structure so that we can wrest this blood money out of the hands of these sleaze bags. Perhaps we could also institute a system of pro-bono labor from previously "obscenely" compensated professions.

Unless, of course, you only mean trial lawyers. But that would be so transparently cynical and partisan, since it would require to knowingly be an enormous hypocrite.

So... welcome aboard the collective express! No more multi-millionaires! No more fat cats getting rich off the backs of the working man! Triple the capital gains tax and full steam ahead.

I'm proud of you, Nick!

I do support a progressive tax system. However I support it to pay for infrastructure and not just for redistribution via things like EITC. There are some issues I am quite progressive on like increasing unionization (which will not happen while we have open borders) and fair trade instead of free. There are lots of areas where I can disagree with both parties and also see monied interests at work. The point is that I don't give those motivations to only certain people of certain parties. Plenty of others do. Edwards is a trial lawyer, and while he did get her an enormous sum, he also took an enormous sum for himself. The costs to pay off that award were passed on to all the small guys.

Don't tell me that every other guy who earns and gets what John Edwards has though is somehow greedy, not paying their fair share, and not looking at for anyone else, but somehow John Edwards is different when he takes the same actions. That is hypocracy. You don't find it a little ironic that the Democratic party is running two guys to represent the less well off people in our society, who are both multimillionairs with huge corporate interests? If Kerry wins he will be the richest president to assume office EVER. Yet we are supposed to believe he is going to sock it to the rich.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #22 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I mean John Edwards took 8+million from the same girl.

Saying this over and over makes you sound just like Carlson.

Yep, Edwards reached right in her pocket and stole 8 million from the poor little girl.


You love to leave out the fact that the little girl got to keep $16 million of the $24 million award, but that doesn't make Edwards sound like he's stealing money from poor helpless little girls, so you just keep saying "Edwards took millions from that poor little girl" over and over and over, in the hopes that someone will begin to equate Edwards with a greedy thief, instead of a legal professional who took his AGREED-UPON-IN-ADVANCE fee as compensation for WINNING the little girl's case

The dissimilation is despicable. Echo chamber indeed. Hey, nothing makes a better echo chamber than an empty cranium!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #23 of 29
It is so transparently partisan to continue this charade about the 8-million doallars . . .

Your pretense at outrage is worse than worst bleeding-heart weeping over butterflieson windshields!!!

Without Edwards hard work, what would she have gotten?

If her case was lost the, what would she have had to pay for lawyer fees if she had one of those one-in-four Republican Trial Lawyers?
What would she have had to pay Edwards if he lost?


As far as the 'evilness of greed' much is revealed by what is done in the pursuit of wealth . . . following a passion, saving lives, is not terribly morally bankrupt . . . not in the least . . .sure they shouldn't squack terribly over contributing their part to our civilization . .. and many don't.
Charging the US government 45$ for toilet seats, or screwing over soldier's meals, or forcing the government to pay for sending valiant truck drivers on deadly fool's errands in empty trucks in a war started in order to ensure your, and your large group of wealthy constituents a profit . . . that IS morally bankrupt.

I'll admit that Edwards took alot of money from the settlement . . . a settlment, though, that he won, and within the bounds of a contract that all signing parties understood.

I think what addabox is sayng, that seems to soom over our head, is that your sudden reversal ofethics with regards to making money by working for it is nothing but completely partisan in origin and is transparently false


I just hope tat that one-in-four Trial Lawyers is getting just about sick of this rhetoric about now and will reconsider their votes.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #24 of 29
BTW, Kerry's wife is rich, he is now married into wealth . . . He does not come fro a wealthy background . . . he was not born into wealth

I don't know that much about Edwards but I believe he also was not born of wealth and worked to achieve it

That sounds like a Republican armband logo for your favorite 'value' in your favorite fantasy image of America: worked his way up . . . and became president . . . and wealthy too!

Its funny how you pull it now as some kind of liability


but its only a liability if you believe the rhetoric that the Right vomits up about what Democrats and Liberals believe:
You assume that Democrats don't like money . . . its a good thing that we don't believe tha caracatures that you make of us
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #25 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Saying this over and over makes you sound just like Carlson.

Yep, Edwards reached right in her pocket and stole 8 million from the poor little girl.


You love to leave out the fact that the little girl got to keep $16 million of the $24 million award, but that doesn't make Edwards sound like he's stealing money from poor helpless little girls, so you just keep saying "Edwards took millions from that poor little girl" over and over and over, in the hopes that someone will begin to equate Edwards with a greedy thief, instead of a legal professional who took his AGREED-UPON-IN-ADVANCE fee as compensation for WINNING the little girl's case

The dissimilation is despicable. Echo chamber indeed. Hey, nothing makes a better echo chamber than an empty cranium!

You're right he's not stealing. But of course given the broad array of choices given the girl, what else is it but extortion? You say it yourself. The choice is cough up eight million or risk having nothing.

As for being agreed upon in advance, only the percentage was agreed upon. Edwards actually put the girl at risk since they were already offering her up to $14 million before going to trial. That amount of money would have easily provided for her for the rest of her life. The part about the other children came out during cross examination and thus insured the larger award, but it was a gamble that he was taking to increase his stake. A gamble he was taking with that little girl to move her from what really rich, to really, really rich? Perhaps it was his own share he was thinking about.

Or, it could be argued that he already knew about the other children in which case he knows the award is guaranteed when it comes out in trial. If he already knew that is guaranteed when giving such damaging information, why not negotiate a lower fee.

It can't be both ways.

As for an echo chamber, just keep telling yourself that a guy with millions including three million dollar houses, is going for the little guy. Meanwhile a guy like Nader is being kept off the ballot in multiple states with Democratic dirty tricks. Obviously those Dems must be all heart.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #26 of 29
You live in LA . . you know a 3 million dollar house is nothing special these days . . well, its big but not that big.

And you never even stop to consider that the case may have been taken on in order to shut down the company or have them be forced to change their modes of operating?

The talking points pages have given you a lot to go on . . hunh? (a lot of nothing!) . . echoing off of that sounding board?
This is so trite and low . . . it makes the sleasiest of character assasinations of the past seem mainstream. . . oh wait a minute. . . . this is the right media's PR construction we're talking about: it is mainstream . .

Not even to say that it is also completely hypocritical of you . . . but like typical trumptman, you will hold on till the argument moves from pathetically bad to even worse until you have another collapse . . .
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #27 of 29
Here's a little fact about the case... Edward's was willing to settle that case for what the companies liablity insurance allowed... at least twice they offered and he declined knowing exactly what they could afford. So it went to trial and they were awarded MORE than what he was willing to settle for.

Know what that tells me? Edwards is fricking GREAT at what he does. His client's didn't PAY him a cent... I'm sure they're not complaining about Edwards' fee.

Edward's is the bad guy because he didn't argue every vicitm's case???

How bout the pool company who didn't fix the problem after the FIRST accident?

I dunno... put him up against Cheney... and we know who america thinks is sleazier.

Go Cheney yourself. hehe. has a nice ring to it.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #28 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by G4Dude
Not to get off topic but how does one's intestines get sucked out by a pool drain? Must be one mother of a drain, probably a bit too much suction for a kiddie pool, or any pool for that matter. As much as I hate John Edwards, it sounds like that one wasn't a stupid lawsuit.

Here's how.
post #29 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by Existence
Here's how.

you are EVIL fitting for this thread as well I dare you to post it there...
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
Reply
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Tucker Carlson: Scumbag