Republicans vs Democarats

[Palehorse]

Ah, you republican conservatives and your religious zealotry / hypocrisy. The next one of you lame brained whacknuts to start trying to utilize the "family values" platform better remember it was one of your very own that sat around back-dooring the 14 million+ unemployed families in this country like they were a piece of dog shit on your shoes.

That flag won't fly no more either! 

[followsthewolf]

Just like their leaders. Sociopathic.

[me]

  Oh my god are you stupid. I'm not knocking you plumbing buddy, he was no more affected by taxes than me. Ask him how bad the insurance company took advantage him on his liability, truck and business insurance, just because he was a plumber. Light your torch in a house and it burns down two week later and "you people" will sue him, ask if him if I'm not right. Now you want to talk about high taxes in California. Well, if you take out the 8 million to 10 million illegal aliens that are there, which you buddy George W. didn't do anything about but talk. Plus all of the millions of dollars INRON stole from them. When Phil Graham , George W's buddy deregulated the energy industry and all of the foreign goods they buy out there, remember it goes through California before it get to you. You talk about all of the entitlements. I have seen so many of "you people" who worshiped the dollar, lived high on the hog, buying the most expensive stuff, get sick, have a stroke, have accident, get caught by the IRS for cheating on their taxes, go broke, lose every you stole.  "you people" are are now on Social Security. Medicare and the government drug plan which "you Republicans" didn't fund.  Then after you have lost your health, all of you expensive stuff and "you people' have go to a nursing home you will Medicaid.  And all of these things were payed by taxes.  Oprah, give me a break, about her leaving California. Hell, California is now a low rent state for her. She moved to Hawaii, have you goggled mapped in her house. WOW.  Plus this one she has 4 or 5 more just as big and expensive. But then again, she a BILLIONAIRE, not bad for a black, woman who started as a TV reporter.  Guess what, she paid her taxes and still did it.  You don't have to steal, cheat, lie, not pay taxes to make it.  You my friend have no conscience quite frankly braindead, you sure don't make sense with your reasoning. Plus your greedy. Now come on, it ain't hard. Since 1948 how many things or laws have the Republicans passed that were good for the common man and woman.  Since 1948 how many laws have the Republicans passed for the corporations, banks, stockmarket, lobbyist, the free traders and the industrial military complex.  Hummmmmm The Troll.

You really need to read something besides the Daily Kos and listen to someone other than Michael Moore and those types.  What made that type of insurance so high is attorney's like John Edwards who decided it was good to sue companies or anyone else for stupid shit and award piles and stacks of money so they could get rich off the backs of insurance companies so naturally the rates had to raise to cover all the idiot law suits like the idiot woman who put the hot cup of coffee in her lap...duh...What was she thinking?  Then there were the thousands of law suits against doctors who had to raise their rates because their coverage went up because of stupid law suits so in turn the insurance companies had to pay out more so they had to raise their rates for health insurance. Do you see a pattern here?  Oh, of course the doctors have to order more tests now to cover their butts so that adds even more to what the insurance company has to pay out which helped increase the cost to the consumer.  Insurance companies are not non for profit nor should they be.  Don't give me that crap about Bush being responsible for high insurance premiums because my health insurance more than doubled in the last few months of the Clinton administration and I had to give it up because it rose from $225pr month with fairly decent coverage, including prescription and 80% of dr. visits, and a $700 deductable to $475 with basic medical, no prescription coverage no doctor visits covered, and $3000 deductable.  Wouldn't have been so bad but I never used it the entire 2yrs I had it so it wasn't like I abused it and was getting to higher rates because I was a risk or something. 

Now call me some more names and show how intelligent you are, or think you are, and how big your insult and cursing vocabulary is. 

Oh, I didn't say Opera wasn't rich I said she doesn't have Cal as her state of residency because of the high taxes.

The influx of illegals started during the Clinton administration and the dems fought doing anything about it when Bush tried so he did what he could with the wall and guards.  Those little groups that fight for the illegals are the dems pet groups ya know.  They get votes for not doing anything about the increasing problem.  It was the dems who decided illegals should get benefits even though they had never paid into the system. Now both sides are afraid of losing votes so neither side does anything.  I didn't know illegals could vote so whats up with that anyway? 

[followsthewolf]

Juries awarded those sums, not political parties.

If the lawsuits didn't have merit, they would not have survived the legal system, right?

Are you unhappy with the legal system?

[me]

Juries awarded those sums, not political parties.

If the lawsuits didn't have merit, they would not have survived the legal system, right?

Are you unhappy with the legal system?

Yes, juries did award those large sums but that doesn't mean it was right.  The point is the attorney's in congress wouldn't let any legislation pass that tried to put the skids to the types of lawsuits that caused all of this in the first place. Those attorney's were getting rich off the backs of insurance companies any way you look at it and John Edwards was one of them.  Why do you think we are besieged with warnings on things about how to use a product?  Remove clothes before ironing, don't stand on top step,( on step ladders), do not use in bath tub, (on hair dryers), and the list goes on.  People blaming others for their own stupidity and attorney's cashing in.  Are you old enough to remember when falling on a play ground a breaking your arm was not grounds to sue the equipment manufacturer for damages?  Remember when getting drunk and injuring someone or worse in an automobile accident was the persons fault and not the fault of the person who might have served them or the establishment where they were last even though they might have left there fine and went somewhere else, even a package liquor store and drank after that which put them over the edge.  The attorney's go for the deepest pockets which is the establishments not the people who are actually responsible.  It is not done for the client it is done for their pockets period.  And to answer your question no, I am not happy with a lot in our legal system and the way things are getting.  Yes, there are some good and honest attorney's but they aren't the rich ones either.

[followsthewolf]

Sounds like your irritation is with the juries (good American citizens, probably patriots all) who made these awards, not the laws that made these lawsuits possible.

If there were no bases for the suits, the money awards would not have been made, right?

Or maybe, I'm totally wrong, 'cuz you have lots of evidence to the contrary, right?

[Palehorse]

Yes, juries did award those large sums but that doesn't mean it was right.  The point is the attorney's in congress wouldn't let any legislation pass that tried to put the skids to the types of lawsuits that caused all of this in the first place. Those attorney's were getting rich off the backs of insurance companies any way you look at it and John Edwards was one of them.  Why do you think we are besieged with warnings on things about how to use a product?  Remove clothes before ironing, don't stand on top step,( on step ladders), do not use in bath tub, (on hair dryers), and the list goes on.  People blaming others for their own stupidity and attorney's cashing in.  Are you old enough to remember when falling on a play ground a breaking your arm was not grounds to sue the equipment manufacturer for damages?  Remember when getting drunk and injuring someone or worse in an automobile accident was the persons fault and not the fault of the person who might have served them or the establishment where they were last even though they might have left there fine and went somewhere else, even a package liquor store and drank after that which put them over the edge.  The attorney's go for the deepest pockets which is the establishments not the people who are actually responsible.  It is not done for the client it is done for their pockets period.  And to answer your question no, I am not happy with a lot in our legal system and the way things are getting.  Yes, there are some good and honest attorney's but they aren't the rich ones either.

First of all we've been up and down this slippery slope a thousand times surrounding responsibility, and the republicans were one of the ones yelling for it the loudest. IIRC.

So in your mind the bartender who over-serves a patron, despite the man/woman's obviously being so drunk they can barely stand, should hold no responsibility if that same patron goes out and hits a crowd of school kids in the cross walk because he/she passed out behind the wheel? Bullshit!

And you guys cry for responsibility out of one side of your mouth while decrying the result of it out of the other! Surprise! More hypocrisy! 

To reiterate:

Sounds like your irritation is with the juries (good American citizens, probably patriots all) who made these awards, not the laws that made these lawsuits possible.

If there were no bases for the suits, the money awards would not have been made, right?

Or maybe, I'm totally wrong, 'cuz you have lots of evidence to the contrary, right?

[me]

My point in bringing that all up is to show a lot of the reason insurance rates have sky rocketed over the last few years.  Law suits and huge payouts do not make for low insurance premiums.

And no, I don't think a bartender or establishment should be held responsible for a customer.  Who is to say when a customer has had enough.  I wouldn't be safe to drive after one and a half drinks where someone else might be able to drink 4 or 5 and be perfectly fine to drive.  I have a friend who used to start drinking as soon as his feet hit the floor in the morning and he drank until he went to bed that night and you couldn't even tell he had been drinking.  What about the bartender or establishment who might be sued for serving someone and then they find out later the person went somewhere else and drank and was actually fine when he left the establishment which was sued? 

Coffee is hot....any person with half a brain should know not to put a styrofoam cup of hot coffee between their legs and try to drive. 

[followsthewolf]

Now I'm really confused.

Just what is "a lot of the reason insurance rates have sky rocketed over the last few years"?

If you showed it, I'm sorry, I missed it.

You just said that insurance rates go up when insurance companies have to pay a lot of claims.

What you didn't support was that legislation was the cause vs. jury awards being the cause.

Or, is that just a result of vast "life experience"?

[Palehorse]

My point in bringing that all up is to show a lot of the reason insurance rates have sky rocketed over the last few years.  Law suits and huge payouts do not make for low insurance premiums.

And no, I don't think a bartender or establishment should be held responsible for a customer.  Who is to say when a customer has had enough.  I wouldn't be safe to drive after one and a half drinks where someone else might be able to drink 4 or 5 and be perfectly fine to drive.  I have a friend who used to start drinking as soon as his feet hit the floor in the morning and he drank until he went to bed that night and you couldn't even tell he had been drinking.  What about the bartender or establishment who might be sued for serving someone and then they find out later the person went somewhere else and drank and was actually fine when he left the establishment which was sued? 

Coffee is hot....any person with half a brain should know not to put a styrofoam cup of hot coffee between their legs and try to drive.

First of all, those very situations are what the legal process is designed to ferret out and bring to light. And you cannot tell me that you are going to bring up that coffee thing at McDonald's again?! Even after you were shown the facts of the case the media conveniently overlooked? (Yet another example surrounding why you often encounter name calling and insults - you believe the propaganda and refuse to even consider the facts despite empirical proof).

And you are still going to believe that insurance industry tripe too? So Katrina, ET AL, have nothing to do with insurance rates either do they? Hey, that industry is nothing more than legalized gambling; they're gambling nothing will happen to you and you gambling that something will. But if you try and welch on the bet they'll cancel you, and if you try to collect they'll welch and get away with it if they can!

Better educated juries (training and instruction) could help with what you see as excessive awards, however once again I will state that the judge sitting in each case has the ability to vacate or modify the award of a jury at his/her discretion, should it be found to be excessive or wrong. The fact is they usually don't because they, like the juries, know the true facts of the case, while armchair judiciaries only know what the media tells them . . .

[me]

Now I'm really confused.

Just what is "a lot of the reason insurance rates have sky rocketed over the last few years"?

If you showed it, I'm sorry, I missed it.

You just said that insurance rates go up when insurance companies have to pay a lot of claims.

What you didn't support was that legislation was the cause vs. jury awards being the cause.

Or, is that just a result of vast "life experience"?

Legislation to stop the frivolous law suits and huge awards is what was stopped.  Juries are sometimes made up of those types of people who have the idea that no one is responsible for their own actions and therefore they are prone to go with the plaintiff whether right or wrong. 

Now take away all the non essential parts out of this conversation and what it comes down to is simply the increase in insurance premiums are the result of what they have been having to pay out due to claims and the increase in costs of medicine and doctor visits plus the increased testing having to be done due to doctors not wanting to be sued due over a misdiagnosis.  Also the chances of your family doctor sending you to a specialist is greater now just to be on the safe side.  Those aren't all bad things but are a contributing factor in the high cost of insurance.  Bottom line, insurance companies pay out more so they charge more just like any other business. 

[me]

Oh just for the record I too think insurance is just legal extortion but the way things are today you almost have to have it, well you do have to have it for your auto and home since the mortgage companies and law requires it.

[The Troll]

  Well, Republicans I have waited several days for answers.  Guess what, no answers, no name of bills in congress.  No amount of tax money they got back, just the answer "The "Troll should know."  Well, I don't know what bills the Republican have passed for the good of the working people.  I don't know how much tax money "those people" got back, I know I didn't get any any money back.   As far as bills the Republicans passed for the corporations and the super-rich, I do know them and tell, but "you guys", don't want to hear them and the truth.

  So Democrats can you name any bills the the Republicans passed for the good of the common man and his family.  I would really like to know.  I do remember George W. going all over the country to get us, the America people to put "all" of our social security money  in the stock market.  Thank God we didn't fall for that B,S.        
The Troll.

[followsthewolf]

Legislation to stop the frivolous law suits and huge awards is what was stopped.  Juries are sometimes made up of those types of people who have the idea that no one is responsible for their own actions and therefore they are prone to go with the plaintiff whether right or wrong. 

Now take away all the non essential parts out of this conversation and what it comes down to is simply the increase in insurance premiums are the result of what they have been having to pay out due to claims and the increase in costs of medicine and doctor visits plus the increased testing having to be done due to doctors not wanting to be sued due over a misdiagnosis.  Also the chances of your family doctor sending you to a specialist is greater now just to be on the safe side.  Those aren't all bad things but are a contributing factor in the high cost of insurance.  Bottom line, insurance companies pay out more so they charge more just like any other business.

I don't disagree with your "Bottom line. . . ." statement.

What I still want you to support is the "Legislation to stop the frivolous lawsuits and huge awards is what was stopped" statement.

[me]

  Well, Republicans I have waited several days for answers.  Guess what, no answers, no name of bills in congress.  No amount of tax money they got back, just the answer "The "Troll should know."  Well, I don't know what bills the Republican have passed for the good of the working people.  I don't know how much tax money "those people" got back, I know I didn't get any any money back.   As far as bills the Republicans passed for the corporations and the super-rich, I do know them and tell, but "you guys", don't want to hear them and the truth.

  So Democrats can you name any bills the the Republicans passed for the good of the common man and his family.  I would really like to know.  I do remember George W. going all over the country to get us, the America people to put "all" of our social security money  in the stock market.  Thank God we didn't fall for that B,S.        
The Troll.

Um, the way I understood the Social Security was to be private bank accounts not tied to anything like the 401K's are.  At any rate the dems would have none of that because they couldn't get their hands on it if it were in people's private bank accounts.