Comments on: Election Day Pickin

By: ZEEK

ZEEK — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:27:28 +0000

TB, I was really just taking a small jab at you for personal enjoyment, but my main point was that people will favor candidates for reasons that are important to them and everyone has different issues that matter to them. I think that too many people will not vote for one person because of just ONE issue, such as abortion, or will vote for them because OF it, even if everything else they stand for is suspect. I think we must take some bad with good and do what’s best as a whole, if it benefits a high majority it is beneficial. I don’t know, perhaps I am just too much of an idealist, I am sick of talking about all of this crap, I give up.

By: Smilyj

Smilyj — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:59:13 +0000

Who is this “anonymous” poster. Maybe he should be “Fatonymous” or maybe “AnonyMoose” would be fitting.

By: travellinbaen

travellinbaen — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:52:53 +0000

I wouldn’t call it an agenda, but certainly a bias. I think I’ve been pretty up front about my bias. All of us are guided by our personal experience and our pocketbooks when we vote.

No, I would not be for Obama if I thought he would appoint more business biased judges. Frivolous lawsuits are few and far between. I can tell you that I reject about 90% of the cases I review and most of them because they will not justify the time and expense rather than because they have no merit. Others I talk to relate a similar experience. Diaz did not have a record of supporting frivolous lawsuits, primarily because they are so few and far between. The mass torts of the 90′s included many frivolous, really fraudulent claims. That isn’t an issue any more, and the correction for it unfortunately killed many valid lawsuits unnecessarily.

I have been on both sides of civil litigation and I know full well the abuses that occurred back in the 1990′s for plaintiffs. That does not excuse the current abuse in favor of business.

I may have a heightened sense of how much fair courts impact society as a whole, but it is also probably the case that society as a whole has a much lower understanding of that impact. In my view, my advocacy concerning our judicial system is very much to the benefit of society as a whole. As an example, the editorial board of one of the major medical journals recently cautioned that lawsuits are an important part of our system of protecting the public from dangerous drugs and that the FDA approval process alone is insufficient. Without litigation, more dangerous drugs will kill more people. Doctors said this.

You raised fair questions and I’m happy to address them.

By: Smilyj

Smilyj — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:31:01 +0000

I personally dont necessarily think TB has an agenda for himself but he does tend to get hot headed with Smilyj. Ahhhh, seems like old times..

By: ZEEK

ZEEK — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:21:58 +0000

TB, just wondering…. You valiantly defend Obama and Diaz with plenty evidence supporting your arguments and you dress it all up real nice and it actually sounds reasonable at times but I wonder if you would be singing the same tune if you thought for one minute that Obama would appoint conservatives to Supreme Court and Diaz would rule against frivolous lawsuits and/or not in your favor per se? Your take on all this mainly has to do with how it will affect you and your profession not society as a whole, which means you have an agenda my friend. Everyone has an agenda, I just think the agenda should be the greater good of the people is all
I’m saying, not the greater good of the few.

By: ZEEK

ZEEK — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:07:16 +0000

I love the smell of political diatribe in the morning!! Everyone has made some interesting points above,but I’m afraid that all the dialogue between ya’ll proves that nothing will change as long as we are focused on parties ,platforms, and agendas. Most people in this country work hard for their money and are underpaid. They want good schools for their kids, affordable healthcare, decent pricing for food and clothing and gas, reasonable banking practices(mortgages), a safe neighborhood, their retirement and soc. security to be there when their older,right? This used to be a foregone conclusion in the good ole USA. Now… not so much, agreed? Everyone from the pols to their supporters are worried about partylines and blame, fingerpointing, etc. What has that helped?
Until our politicians actually start trying to help their constituents by voting for them instead of lobbyists and special interests and voting themselves pay raises nothing will change for the better no matter who is in charge. We need term limits for congress and less pay. If these positions weren’t seen as an easy payday career that gives carte blanche to so much, maybe the silver spoons and greedy crooks would wreak havoc in other venues besides politics. The fighting and fingerpointing that has caused such a stalemate between parties has to end. Work together to make our country better, isn’t that the goal?
Stop the waste on things aren’t as important as others, use common sense. Maybe a little less money spent on space program ( I know we need it but trillions, I mean let’s worry about America first, then Mars) and the war on drugs(yeah, how’s that working out?) and welfare(put time limit on aid and teach them a trade or free assoc. degree and tie their tubes or limit their aid to two kids no matter if they keep having them, then get them off welfare) I am rambling now, sorry, but I just hope that all these people who think Obama is going to save the world are able to handle the disappointment when the staus quo is the same in 3-4 years or more likely worse if REAL change does not occur that does not seem forthcoming.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!

By: travellinbaen

travellinbaen — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:46:27 +0000

This (see link below) is what’s been going on in the Supreme Court. Jim Smith just got thrown out on his ass. It is generally opined in the legal community that with him gone, the Court will begin to follow precedent and will be less activist. I don’t believe it will change much, since the Chamber spent the money to get a majority of them installed, but I am hopeful.

And yes, TB would be a much better choice for choosing Judges than either the electorate or the MS Governor or legislature.

http://travellinbaen.wordpress.com/2008/06/30/read-this-article-then-my-next-post/

By: Smilyj

Smilyj — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:31:57 +0000

“Criminal” may be out of line. But the judicial system in Mississippi is looked down on nationally. I trust that the voters are not completely ignorant and voted as informed citizens, for whatever reasons. And when it comes to the supreme court in Mississippi, many people know whats going on. Or maybe just one person who knows more than anyone else should decide all the judges and not have elections.

By: Smilyj

Smilyj — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:08:22 +0000

I said he worked in Pascagoula with pascagoulans. Not from here. But it still matters. And anyone for any candidate can say “he was apponited by so and so and fundend by so and so.” Those assertions didnt work against Obama and shouldn’t be considered legitamate in this smaller circumstance. Everyone has to be funded somewhere. I’m sure there are those kinds of issues with any candidate in any election. I doubt very seriously that it was asserted that “Hey buddy if you are funded then you must do our bidding for us.” If proof of that comes out then I will change my opinions. But too say the coast deserves anything they get as it comes to insurance companies and hurricanes is much more ignorant. And I do not think you are ignorant by the way.

By: Jessie Lou

Jessie Lou — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 16:59:08 +0000

MD – I was wondering your abs were a little tighter this morning from all the wretching you must have been doing! Just remember – every dawg (pun intended) has his day. Stay tuned for the what comes next. As Matt Lauer said this morning – America loves to build someone up and they love to watch as they are torn down. A paraphrase at best, but true nonetheless.