The GOP's Trial Lawyer
Frustrated that they don't have much to attack John Edwards with, the Republicans have latched on to "trial lawyer" as their main criticism of choice with the other being "inexperienced" (which is laughable when you compare it to Bush's).
But WAIT! STOP THE PRESSES! Guess what? Rove's annointed one in the Florida Senate race, Republican Mel Martinez, is -- you guessed it -- a trial lawyer.
So what are average voting American's to make of this contradiction? Easy:
Your lawyer is a bottom dwelling, scum sucking, shark.
Our lawyer is a zealous advocate for his clients' rights.
So, just for fun I thought I'd attached an image of a letter written by John Edwards, age 11: Why I Want To Be A Lawyer
But WAIT! STOP THE PRESSES! Guess what? Rove's annointed one in the Florida Senate race, Republican Mel Martinez, is -- you guessed it -- a trial lawyer.
Quote:
"President Bush and his surrogates invoke greedy trial lawyers and their zest for junk lawsuits at every campaign stop," said McCollum's campaign manager, Matt Williams. "The similarities between Martinez and Edwards are striking, and a Martinez candidacy would greatly hamper our ability to present a unified message ... Quite frankly, sending such blatantly mixed signals would be bad politics and potentially damaging to the president."
Similarly, a top campaign consultant to Gallagher blasted Martinez' candidacy for rendering useless in Florida a political weapon against the top of the Democratic ticket.
"The trial attorney label is such an easy hit out of the ballpark to bang at Edwards with, and Mel Martinez has taken that away,'" said Richard Pinsky, Gallagher's chief strategist.
State Republican Party officials criticized Edward as too liberal for Florida voters. Party spokesman Joseph Agostini stopped short of mentioning anything about his trial attorney background. Similarly, Gov. Jeb Bush, who chastised McCollum Tuesday for attacking Martinez, also avoided a straight-out attack on Edwards as a trial lawyer.
Bush said the attention should be on Edwards' "voting record" and "the broader issues are the more important ones." He also said McCollum is off base comparing Martinez with Edwards, saying such claims are "an exaggeration."
"President Bush and his surrogates invoke greedy trial lawyers and their zest for junk lawsuits at every campaign stop," said McCollum's campaign manager, Matt Williams. "The similarities between Martinez and Edwards are striking, and a Martinez candidacy would greatly hamper our ability to present a unified message ... Quite frankly, sending such blatantly mixed signals would be bad politics and potentially damaging to the president."
Similarly, a top campaign consultant to Gallagher blasted Martinez' candidacy for rendering useless in Florida a political weapon against the top of the Democratic ticket.
"The trial attorney label is such an easy hit out of the ballpark to bang at Edwards with, and Mel Martinez has taken that away,'" said Richard Pinsky, Gallagher's chief strategist.
State Republican Party officials criticized Edward as too liberal for Florida voters. Party spokesman Joseph Agostini stopped short of mentioning anything about his trial attorney background. Similarly, Gov. Jeb Bush, who chastised McCollum Tuesday for attacking Martinez, also avoided a straight-out attack on Edwards as a trial lawyer.
Bush said the attention should be on Edwards' "voting record" and "the broader issues are the more important ones." He also said McCollum is off base comparing Martinez with Edwards, saying such claims are "an exaggeration."
So what are average voting American's to make of this contradiction? Easy:
Your lawyer is a bottom dwelling, scum sucking, shark.
Our lawyer is a zealous advocate for his clients' rights.
So, just for fun I thought I'd attached an image of a letter written by John Edwards, age 11: Why I Want To Be A Lawyer
Comments
Originally posted by Northgate
Frustrated that they don't have much to attack John Edwards with, the Republicans have latched on to "trial lawyer" as their main criticism of choice with the other being "inexperienced" (which is laughable when you compare it to Bush's).
But WAIT! STOP THE PRESSES! Guess what? Rove's annointed one in the Florida Senate race, Republican Mel Martinez, is -- you guessed it -- a trial lawyer.
So what are average voting American's to make of this contradiction? Easy:
Your lawyer is a bottom dwelling, scum sucking, shark.
Our lawyer is a zealous advocate for his clients' rights.
So, just for fun I thought I'd attached an image of a letter written by John Edwards, age 11: Why I Want To Be A Lawyer
You seem to have missed the point.
Originally posted by Northgate
Frustrated that they don't have much to attack John Edwards with, the Republicans have latched on to "trial lawyer" as their main criticism of choice with the other being "inexperienced" (which is laughable when you compare it to Bush's).
But WAIT! STOP THE PRESSES! Guess what? Rove's annointed one in the Florida Senate race, Republican Mel Martinez, is -- you guessed it -- a trial lawyer.
So what are average voting American's to make of this contradiction? Easy:
Your lawyer is a bottom dwelling, scum sucking, shark.
Our lawyer is a zealous advocate for his clients' rights.
So, just for fun I thought I'd attached an image of a letter written by John Edwards, age 11: Why I Want To Be A Lawyer
I'll tell you what North, I won't vote for any ticket that features Mel Martinez as the presidential or vice-presidential nominee. Will you do the same on the Democratic side regarding Edwards?
As for the letter, I'm so glad that Edwards followed his ambitions and worked as a defensive criminal attorney... oh wait... he didn't. He went for malpractice claims.
In fact he is part of the problem health care is so unaffordable for some. He helps drive up the insurance premiums.
Nick
In fact he is part of the problem health care is so unaffordable for some. He helps drive up the insurance premiums.
Juries decide amounts, not lawyers. And aside from that, jury awards are *at best* #3 on the list of why insurance is so expensive.
#1 - Medical costs (equipment, drugs)
#2 - Bad investments by insurance companies needing to be covered
link
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Northgate clearly attacks the hypocrisy of the pejorative "trial-lawyer" label, not the profession itself, Trumptman.
The hypocracy is in declaring Republican trial lawyers good while declaring Democratic trial lawyers bad. I mean Democrats can claim to be standing up for minorities against evil, rich, white men. Of course that also happens to be what they are running for president and v.p. They can claim to be against corporate greed even though teh Heinz fortune is so large that almost every issue would become a conflict of interest regarding Kerry. The Democrats you plenty of labels that they happen to occasionally resemble as well. I didn't claim he was implicating all lawyers. I even told him I wouldn't vote for Republican trial lawyers if he would do the same for Democratic.
So I don't get your point.
Nick
Originally posted by groverat
Juries decide amounts, not lawyers. And aside from that, jury awards are *at best* #3 on the list of why insurance is so expensive.
#1 - Medical costs (equipment, drugs)
#2 - Bad investments by insurance companies needing to be covered
link
Your op-ed doesn't give an order. You assign it an order. Secondly I'll take the AMA over your op-ed other any day of the week. Lastly, the GAO and CBO are two different offices. I would like to see the full report to see the context of one quoting the other.
Finally regardless of the spinning in the op-ed, it still mentions that medical care availability is down, and insurance premiums are way up.
Nick
Originally posted by groverat
Juries decide amounts, not lawyers. And aside from that, jury awards are *at best* #3 on the list of why insurance is so expensive.
#1 - Medical costs (equipment, drugs)
#2 - Bad investments by insurance companies needing to be covered
link
[cough]BULLSHIT[/cough] Pardon me I have a dry throat.
Bob Herbert's "Malpractice Myths"
and here
The New York Times on medical malpractice
and rounding it out ...
Herbert on med-mal, cont'd
Originally posted by Scott
[cough]BULLSHIT[/cough] Pardon me I have a dry throat.
Bob Herbert's "Malpractice Myths"
and here
The New York Times on medical malpractice
and rounding it out ...
Herbert on med-mal, cont'd
So, by this logic, are you going to actively speak out against Mel Martinez running for the senate? Either being a trial lawyer is a disqualifier or it's not. Either having a potty mouth is a disqualifier or it's not. All this selective outrage makes you guys look like hypocrits.
Mel Martinez should be proud of his profession. So should Edwards. So should Abraham Lincoln.
The "trial attorney" slur doesn't seem to have much weight outside of the Chamber of Commerce, which claimed being a trial lawyer was a deal breaker when it hit back hard against the Edwards selection.
Unless that trial lawyer is a Republican. If you want to see hypocrisy at its finest, check out how the Chamber of Commerce endorsed Mel Martinez, trial lawyer, in Florida's GOP Senate race. Why? Martinez is Rove's annointed one, and there was probably a great deal of backroom pressure to make the endorsement.
So go ahead beaches, spin this one away like you do so well. Yours good. Mine bad.
Scoop has been following this story for months with little notice from Democrats. A "hotseat" has been up on the Internet for months now to keep this issue in the public eye. Please visit:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0403/S00177.htm
But, hey, he's endorsed by Rove (by extension the president) and the GOP. So this must just be more liberal villainy, I guess.
Originally posted by SDW2001
You seem to have missed the point.
You always miss the point ( when it's inconvenient ).
And of course "trial lawyer" isn't really who they're against. The lawyers who defend corporations against malpractice suits are just as much trial lawyers as plaintiff's attorneys. Are they evil too? But who cares about precision when you're demonizing.
In 1994, an eight-year old girl named Valerie Lakey was playing in a wading pool. She got caught in a defective drain. Her intestines were ripped from her body by the suction. She is now 17. She will have to be fed through a tube, 12 hours a day, for the rest of her life. In 1997, John Edwards won her family a $25 million judgment, of which he took a portion. The judgment helped jump-start his political career.
On the first day of last year, as part of his opening comments on Crossfire, this is how the incident was described by Tucker Carlson, whom public and private broadcasting networks tumble all over themselves to hire: "Four years ago, he (Edwards) was a personal-injury lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases."
Jacuzzi cases.
An eight-year old who got disemboweled.
Jacuzzi cases.
A child who'll have to be fed through a tube for as long as she lives.
Jacuzzi cases.
Now, I know it's a terrible thing when Whoopi Goldberg makes salacious fun of C-Plus Augustus's last name. I know that society may simply collapse. But here is a professional communicator at the top of his profession who, because he couldn't come up with anything else to say at the moment, smugly dispatches the tragedy of a child whose guts were ripped out. (Later in the same show, he told co-host James Carville to "Lighten up," about his comments.) It was an interesting evening -- not only should Tucker Carlson have lost every job in the professional media that he has, and not only did he lose forever any right to criticize anyone for intemperate speech, he at that moment should have been shunned by decent people for the rest of his sorry life.
Jacuzzi cases.
Christ.