It's kerry and Edwards

Plus I'll get to see the Edwards/ Cheney debate! Yay!!!

sozobe wrote:

Plus I'll get to see the Edwards/ Cheney debate! Yay!!!

You have an excellent point there. I imagine Edwards will chew Cheney up in cross examination till hell won't have it.

Still though, the enormously well funded GOP will have little trouble painting him as a smooth talking, wealthy, ambulance chaser. The arguments will be Sleazebag Vs. Baby Saver and I predict it will get very ugly.

au1929 I believe the wager limit is $500 on this type of bet. If that's not enough, I can provide you with more credible sites in addition to this one.

BPB, I said Baby Saver and I was referring to Edward's Championing the cause of Brain Damaged Children. Btw, where does ability to "channel dead babies" rank on your checklist? (he actually claimed this )

Upon looking further into it though, I can see both sides will be right. He got rich grabbing huge verdicts for a tiny percentage of the victim's families... But then spoke out against a bill that would "limit awards and create a fund to be shared by all families with similarly afflicted children".


Sorry Soz, he looks pretty sleazy to me. Read this.

Bill perhaps if you were to speak to the family of the little girl whose intestines were literally sucked out of her ass as she swam in the pool, and please think HARD about that image, and the quality of her life and the grief of her parents, you would get a different perspective on these "ridiculously" large settlements than the one given by those who will attempt to use it against Edwards.. What besides money is there to give to this child or her parents

Bill perhaps if you were to speak to the family of the little girl whose intestines were literally sucked out of her ass as she swam in the pool, and please think HARD about that image, and the quality of her life and the grief of her parents, you would get a different perspective on these "ridiculously" large settlements than the one given by those who will attempt to use it against Edwards.. What besides money is there to give to this child or her parents

Upon looking further into it though, I can see both sides will be right. He got rich grabbing huge verdicts for a tiny percentage of the victim's families... But then spoke out against a bill that would "limit awards and create a fund to be shared by all families with similarly afflicted children".

The question is did Edwards deserve to get 1/3rd of that award and then still make them pay all the legal fees and costs on top of it?

Feh. Most lawyers merely go through life justifying their own existence.

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Bill perhaps if you were to speak to the family of the little girl whose intestines were literally sucked out of her ass as she swam in the pool, and please think HARD about that image, and the quality of her life and the grief of her parents, you would get a different perspective on these "ridiculously" large settlements than the one given by those who will attempt to use it against Edwards.. What besides money is there to give to this child or her parents

There probably isn't anything but money to give to her parents and, IMO, they probably deserve the $25 million award. The question is did Edwards deserve to get 1/3rd of that award and then still make them pay all the legal fees and costs on top of it?

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Bill perhaps if you were to speak to the family of the little girl whose intestines were literally sucked out of her ass as she swam in the pool, and please think HARD about that image, and the quality of her life and the grief of her parents, you would get a different perspective on these "ridiculously" large settlements than the one given by those who will attempt to use it against Edwards.. What besides money is there to give to this child or her parents

BPB, that is a very disturbing mental image and I don't appreciate you making me visualize it. I didn't say "ridiculously large settlements" and in fact voiced no opinion as to whether or not the families deserve them. I don't believe there exists a sum of money that could replace a baby. Your argument is ignoring the 99% of the families of ghastly victims like you described when in fact your hero spoke out against a bill that was designed to give them some relief as well. Don't get mad at me; I'm merely relaying the facts.

Your concern is indeed touching, O'BILL.

I suppose, then, that you would also favor a bill that would limit a company's profits and create a fund to be shared by all the victims of that company's negligence.