Tucker: John Edwards Can't Be President, His House Is Too Big
By Logan Murphy Thursday Dec 20, 2007 9:00pm
Download | play 
Download | play
MSNBC claims to have a great political line up, yet they continue to allow feckless Tucker Carlson to darken their network. To show just how low the bar can be lowered, Tucker decides that John Edwards' large house makes for good political discussion. Never mind the fact that both John and Elizabeth came from modest means and built their wealth, they're hypocrites because they're liberals -- you just can't own a huge house and still care about people who are less fortunate -- therefore, he's not fit to be president.
What's even more frustrating is to see Bob Franken and Slate's Melinda Henneberger play along with this foolishness. Henneberger says that while Elizabeth Edwards is a wonderful person that everybody loves, she's the one who wanted the huge house and boy, that really runs counter to the message that she and her husband are trying to put out on the campaign trail. Since Edwards' campaign speeches have been about how we need to find ways to balance the great disparities between the very rich and those less fortunate and make sure that those who are less well off have the same opportunities to succeed as the wealthy, I'm missing where that goes off message.
It's reported that Rachel Maddow is taping a pilot for a new show for MSNBC and we can only hope that she succeeds and replaces Tucker Carlson. Write to MSNBC and tell them what you think of Tucker and Rachel Maddow...
John Amato: I guess it's just dandy that Bush owns a big ranch in Texas and made millions of dollars off of the sale of the Texas Rangers, but John Edwards couldn't possibly want to help people because he has a big house. Arggg.
Login or Register to post comments.
Tucker is a dufus.
So is his wife.
Why doesn't this country put up better persons to run for president?
Tucker's Brain Is Too Small.
Tucker, Tucker, listen to you. You sound so envious of Edwards. He has a 28,000ft house that his wife is happy with. That would be reason enough for most married men to see that he knows how to please the Mrs. You on the other hand..........oh never mind, you would not understand anyway.
This coming from a guy who's not fit to be on TV........................well......
How can this guy show his face in public after Jon Stewart humiliated him so thoroughly on crossfire?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
Actually...um, 28,000 square feet? Please. That IS a pretty fair piece of conspicuous consumption, is it not? Tucker is a dolt, but in this case he has a point. How can Edwards talk about global warming and such, much less pass laws regarding it, when he is so utterly open to criticism on this point? He will inevitably be called a hypocrite, and much as I love the guy, I have to say it looks like the label will fit.
Dump this *sshole, already and put on Doctor Maddow, already.
More "shiny keys...look over there" than I can handle from this fruitcake.
What's Pucker's daddy doing now Scooter is free and doesn't need anymore money to defend himself...or does he??
Of course it is okay that Bush owns a large ranch in Texas. He isn't a hypocrite because he doesn't care about poor people at all. See that makes him a good President.
I guess that FDR wasn't a good President for the poor either, because he was filthy rich when he became President and those stupid poor people elected him to office 4 times. I guess they didn't know what a hypocrite he was, developing jobs and programs to get people back to work.
It's really about class, isn't it. John Edwards had to work for his fortune, and Bush and FDR were born to theirs. Where Bush has never done one damned thing for people less fortunate than himself, FDR with all of his riches, steered this country out of the great depression that another republican depression got us into.
Tucker Carlson should learn a thing or two. His stupidity is embarrassing.
Tucker is just trying to convince people bigger ISN'T better (if-you-know-what-I-mean-and-I-think-you-do).
Johnny Boy scares the crap outta losers like Tucker. I think it's the faint whiff of substance JE exudes that turns their collective stomach. That and his hair, oddly.
AND...
So this guy goes from dirt poor to a huge friggin house? Sounds like the American dream worked out there to me...
to agree with the previous 'anonymous' quote, a 28,000 square foot home is not merely 'big' as much as unnecessarily extravagant. The legitimate question is not his wealth, but what that ostentatiousness suggests about his values.
Tucker acts like am immature teenager. I’ve been saying for years how much I hate this little twit.
I don’t know how many times I have written to MSNBC and Dan Abrams to tell them how bad Tucker is for MSNBC. It sounds like finally they have listened.
Took them long enough.
It's not terribly surprising to see someone from Slate agreeing with a conservative.
I guess Tucker was jealous cuz Jonah was getting all the attention. He wants to be GOP dipshit of the weak.
I don’t know how many times I have written to MSNBC and Dan Abrams to tell them how bad Tucker is for MSNBC. It sounds like finally they have listened. Took them long enough.
I have to say though that the huge house is not really good PR for Edwards. How bid is it anyway? 43,000 square feet (I know it’s an exaggeration but isn’t it like 12000 or more square feet?)? I really never have been able to understand how it would be comfortable to live in a HUGE house like that.
bidbigWasn't Tucker born with a silver spoon
up his ass....err...in his mouth?Dubya was born with a silver foot in his mouth - Ann Richards
Tucker is the best show on TV. He is such a pain and the ass and pisses everyone off. He often brings up very legitimate points that no one else dares too. He is also a democrat, but very hard on the democrats, and rightly so.
For the record. John Edwards is my first choice as President.
I'm leaning towards Edwards.
I'm not voting for Obama, but I will vote "present".
With Bush, that's not to mention that he's failed at everything he's ever attempted, but he was bailed out countless times. As Ann Richards said, Bush was "born on third base, thinking he hit a triple." John and Elizabeth Edwards have earned their successes.
Besides hackdom, this is typical conservative projection. Tucker can't imagine compassion for the poor, so Edwards' must be fake. In an earlier era, as Bob Somerby noted, Edwards would have been called a traitor to his class, as was FDR, another rich advocate for the poor.
As for Maddow - boy, that would be fantastic. Every time I've seen her, she's been sharp, insightful, and witty. She's got the chops and the style.
When you write your emails it might be a good idea to write a few or send them a few different times. It's Friday night a few days before Christmas. You know damn well they have a skeleton crew working. Just resend them a few times over the next couple weeks. Just to be sure somebody who knows how to read gets them. Hell the janitor is probably the only one reading the emails at this time on this weekend.
Not that there is anything wrong with janitors.
"Tucker Can't Be A Journalist- His Butt Is Too Big"
I meant to add:
Having said that I am going to vote for Edwards. I really like him and he can spend his money any way he wants.
Tucker is becoming increasingly delusional. It's embarrassing. He's been like a scared rabbit since Jon Stewart blew up Crossfire on him. Losing his show would be devastating. Yes, Tucker could always write for one of Pop's friends. But unlike TV, in print he can't drown out the naysayers by shouting.
AF
Being rich is ok if your a republican. A Democrat must be poor.
What the fuck kind of thinking is that? Look at the Kennedy's compound, and they have done right by people. FDR wasn't too shabby, either when it came to helping people.
Rich, poor, white, black, brown, cross-eyed, spotted, Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, straight, gay, whatever. This country needs NEEDS a decent person to start to right the wrongs that have been inflicted on us the past 8 years (it will be 8).
We need someone who cares CARES about this country.
I support John Edwards 100%. I could give a rats arse if he lives in a mansion or a packing crate under the Hoositanic bridge.
Tucker KNOWS he's full of shit. That's what makes him completely unsufferable.
Tucker should stop trying to analyze wealthy people who speak up for the less fortunate and analyze people who thought bringing back the Mark Twain bow tie look was going to catch on last year.
Jo @ 27:
Well Edwards has a history of fighting for the poor or disenfranchised or whatever against big corporations. That is why the MSM dismiss him. They are afraid of him. MSM are big corporations.
Of course I’m preaching to the choir here.
Huckabee pardoned a rapist who went on to rape and murder but who cares? Look at the size of Edwards house. Its huge! Hes a hypocrite! A president cant live in a huge house like that and fight poverty! Its impossible!
Love that Jon Stewart clip
His Values? Maybe it says he hopes all his little birdies come back home to roost, maybe he plans to turn it into a museum or perhaps turn it into a school. Maybe he wants a place to be alone and safe, since those that are vocal and active about standing up to TPTB sometimes run into trouble. Maybe Elizabeth likes to pretend shes a princess... Really, who gives a crap? Tucker sure as hell doesn't. Ostentatious displays of wealth are probably the only form of love he recieves.
No, what chaps Tuckers face shaped ass is that John Edwards doesn't just read the Bible to get snappy one liners those religious nuts lap up, he actually believes that crap. It is legitimate and shit, and damn but Guliani isn't selling he's even SEEN a bible and Mike Huckabee is a fucking lunatic.... Romney can't open his mouth without lying out of one side of it. Who the hell knows if Thompon's going to feel like getting out of bed on any given morning... John Edwards is the kind of guy that a hardcore gasbag godbag could feel good about voting for, and Tucker is laying the HYPOCRITE groundwork. Tucker is pretty sure that word was in the Bible.
I am not a huge Edwards supporter, but since hearing Obama would even consider hiring Arnold, I have to question his judgement. Or Sanity. Or whatever.
Did I mention that I hate Tucker Carlson. Iwant to make that perfectly clear.
I hate the asshole.
abarts @ 18:
I heard Glen Beck was born with a silver coat hanger in his ear.
By any chance, has Tucker seen the house at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.? It's not too shabby.
Captain Kangaroo @ 29:
We may be the choir, but at least we can sing on key. And, btw, I used to watch you on tv when I was a kid. How's Mr. Green Jeans doing?
Seriously, MSM are afraid of anyone who can't be bought.
Tucker's wife and kids should be in all our prayers this Christmas.
Maybe if we all concentrated together, we could make Tucker's head explode.
Tucker Carlson ...? Is he still on the air ?
Tucker is a tool.
Please get Tucker and Joe off the air waves. With Keith Oberman and Dan Abrams NBC is starting to shine. I hope NBC brass is watching.
You see this is the kind of shit they are going to pull throughout the campaign. It will get worse as they pick up even more of the media then they already own, operate and control.
We have got to somehow get these idiots in Congress to see that this six man media ownership is going to finish this country off.
These people are not for the betterment of this country at all. They are the catalyst of destruction, just as George W Bush is.
It is simply not fair to allow these people to continue to dictate and control what people want to see and here .
It is wrong, wrong wrong and I plan to continue blasting these bastards until they get the hell off the air waves and I hope that millions and millions of American people finely get so sick and tired of these ass holes that we take to the streets and go after their asses in numbers so huge, it will scare the living hell out of them and their families, as they are doing to us.
This is a democratic country and we are featuring all these red neck, right wing ass holes, that contradict any and everything, anybody says or does to try to make some kind of difference for the betterment of this country.
Senator Edwards and his wife are good decent people, who want to show the world a different side of what they have seen in the last seven years of this Bush dictatorship and these ass holes don't like it.
Well, this is to tell all of them that they may as well get ready for more and more and more of it, because people like Senator Edwards and his wife are the faces of America that we want the world to stop, look and listen too.
Stop the bull shit.
as a solid democrat, i gotta say i don't mind Tucker Carlson -- he usually has interesting guests and isn't horribly infuriatingly unfair in his discourse -- even if most of his ideas tend to make me ill.
Maddow has a speech pattern that includes the overuse of "I mean" that drives me up a wall. It's not as bad as my nephew's "like" but it's quite noticeable. I hope she can cure it, because she's otherwise pretty literate.
So what is really going on here on this cozy little Tucker stage? Hmmmmm?
Tucker spouting off about rich liberals and not getting it and tweedledum and tweedledummer chiming in about the hypocrisy of it all, someone who is rich trying to be an advocate for the poor?
Well a quick look at history shows that perhaps the most successful progressive President in History, FDR was exactly that:
Excerpts:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/New_Deal_opposition.htm
But there is much more going on here that than the usual Tucker style idiocy and Glen Greenwald has taken it up big time and his whole post at Salon is a must read.:
Media hostility toward anti-establishment candidates
Excerpts
There is no question that the media has paid far less attention to Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee than the respective successes of their campaigns merit. To that list, though, I would add a third candidacy that has received far less media attention than it merits by all objective metrics (polls, stature and money): the John Edwards campaign. In 2004, Edwards was the party's Vice Presidential nominee, came closer than anyone else to beating Kerry, and has continuously been very near the top of Iowa's polls. Yet the media has all but ignored him -- it's Clinton v. Obama in their World -- except to mock him on the pettiest of grounds, from his hair to his house.
SNIP!
Edwards, Paul and Huckabee are obviously disparate in significant ways -- ideologically, temperamentally, and otherwise. But there is a vital attribute common to those three campaigns that explains the media's scorn: they are all, in their own ways, anti-establishment candidates, meaning they are outside and critical of the system of which national journalists are a critical part, the system which employs and rewards our journalists and forms the base of their identity and outlook. Any candidate who criticizes and opposes that system -- not in piecemeal ways but fundamentally -- will be, first, ignored and, then, treated as losers by the press.
It is very striking how little Edwards' substantive critique of our political system has penetrated into the national discourse. That's because the centerpiece of his campaign is a critique that is a full frontal assault on our political establishment. His argument is not merely that the political system needs reform, but that it is corrupt at its core -- "rigged" in favor of large corporate interests and their lobbyists, who literally write our laws and control the Congress. Anyone paying even casual attention to the extraordinary bipartisan effort on behalf of telecom immunity, and so many other issues driven almost exclusively by lobbyists, cannot reasonably dispute this critique.
Yet because that argument indicts the same Beltway culture of which our political journalists are an integral part, and further attacks the system's power brokers who are the friends, sources, and peers of those journalists, they instinctively react with confusion, scorn and hostility towards Edwards' campaign. They condescendingly dismiss it as manipulative populist swill, or cynically assume that it's just a ploy to distinguish himself by "moving left." In the eyes of our Beltawy press, the idea that our political system is "rigged" or corrupt must be anything other than true or sincerely held.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/19/establishment_candidat...
with all love to keith, it is time to boycott all of the corporate media outlets.
it is too much you all. we have to draw a line.
even on keith's show--and i'm sorry keith i love you but it is infotainment--britney updates, that horrible michael musto and all the paeons to the so called main stream stuff.
i swear on any god you want to front--i do not know any one person enthralled by the main stream entertainment/news, whatever.
not one.
turn it off.
i salute c&l for being one of the watch dogs we so need in these times; they and other outlets like them please keep doing what you do but the rest of us--the millions of us--need to do one thing only--turn it off--leave it off and look only to this and other honest reporters for the information that concerns those that seek the news about serious issues, not those who are interested in jackie's hat style, hillary's cackle or even laura stepford bush's mechanical inner works--these propagandists/entertainters need a dose of $ or maybe -$ and these few watchdogs have taken on the loathsome task of watching it so we don't have to. they are the pros and need to keep looking and sorting, the rest of us need to stop adding our numbers to the time warner, g.e. and disney kitty.
you don't have to boycott their sponsors. if you never look, you will not see the slick 'drink my beer' or or 'use my effing shampoo ads...no problem keeping a mental list of who to not patronize. keep a much shorter list of who to patronize.
simplify, downsize and refuse to use and use and use.
Captain Kangaroo @ 33:
Just the other day I was thinking we had collectively put this idiot on ignore. but here he is, being his stupid self.
Oh, you know, having abig house is a good idea if you have to entertain a ton of people involved in your efforts to make a change in the world...
Speaking of that big ole ranch in Crawford, Texas, I would sure like to see an accounting of it. I understand it's state of the art in every aspect. It supposedly sustains everything needed for life right there on the site. Electricity, water supply etc. This has to have cost milions and millions. I know the "owner" is the most paranoid person walking the earth, but I want to know how much of it we paid for?
I'll be really blunt. I think the GOP just want to put up any Old White Guy against The "Bitch" or the "Black".
I know that sounds extremely crude, but I think that's their "winning" strategery. That's why MSM ignores Edwards...
I don't mean to be offensive...just trying to read the offensive small minds of tools like Tucker. Apologies.
Yet Bush 1 owns a "compound" in Maine among other crime family properties here and in countries without extradition laws. I think a ranch, a compound, and a South American hideout beats a large house any day. Forgive me though, I'd rather have John Edwards and his big house than a Bush under any circumstances.
Tucker, go away and dream of supposedly beating up gay guys who supposedly bothered you in a public bathroom and leave us sane people alone.
Like anyone would decide not to like Edwards because of the size of his house....oh plezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz tucker boy. We got rid of his bow tie, now HIM! Dear MSNBC,I will watch your cable network all the time if you would ax this pea brained fool.
we all need to live more efficently. edwards house is too big if you consider the number of occupants but i would vote for him.
Actually, "THE HOUSE" isn't 28,000 square feet.
Most of the PHYSICAL STRUCTURE on the property is "THE BARN," which includes the squash court, pool, basketball court, and offices and living quarters for guests.
The "HOUSE" is much smaller than the barn, so when they portray it as "A HOUSE" that's 28,000 square feet, they are actually LYING.
This all drives me nuts.
The point of changing environmental laws and protecting our less fortunate is not to make sure nobody has big houses. It's not to make sure everyone with money gives it all away to someone else. It's to put a better overall system in place, on the scale were it can make a difference.
Whenever someone says "Oh gee, they are right about Al Gore, doesn't he do more damage with a plane than I do with a car?" Well, yes, but he is using that plane to achieve his goal of turning these laws around. If he were to succeed, then all the jet fuel he has ever used would cancel out, because changing the emissions laws of an entire country is the only thing that will have any impact.
Guys like Gore and Edwards are allowed to have huge houses and huge jets all they want, and they are not hypocrites for having it so long as their larger goal is to share wealth with the less fortunate, or to make a cleaner earth.
it just drives me nuts when people concede on these things. John Edwards isn't doing a damn thing wrong. He isn't a hypocrite. He isn't saying "Hey rich people, give up your huge houes, and give back." He's saying, let us not lock ourselves in our huge mansions and forget about those not as fortunate as us.
Especially at Christmas time, what could be more sensible than that?
all of these creeps.
how nice is their space? do they ever pass homeless ppl? why don't they invite them home?
by their Bolshevik logic, any person with lebensraum larger than their own needs should share that space with 'the stranger without a cloak'
where should the edwards family reside? when any one person earns more money than is needed for their own shelter and sustenance, shouldn't ALL of the largess be given to the less advantaged?
christian? left wing view?
what are you saying tucker? should anyone running for public office forfeit all of his wealth so that the playing field is leveled?
tucker, you commie bastard.
Don't suppose Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson mentioned that each of his given names came with with an eight figure trust fund. Did he mention that Edwards made his money by representing people suing the corporate interests Tucker was born to inherit? Hmmm... I wonder if any of Edwards' cases were brought against Swanson.
As always, with great loving kindness I might add ... most of these people on TV are mentally ill keeping the great freakshow traditions alive. Isn't Tucker a puffy-faced, rich, silver spoon fat-ass? Or, is that some other Tucker?
Who was the genius that Ever thought that tucker had anything worthwhile to say?
Can't Wait for Rachel
Bye bowtie lil man
Fucker Carlson doesn't understand noblesse oblige.
This is Exhibit A: There IS a vast right wing conspiracy in the media. Their M.O. is to state a lie and repeat it again and again and again unchallenged and unquestioned, until finally the public believes it to be true. In this case the big lie is that Democrats abhor wealth and financial success, therefore any Democrat or Liberal who achieves it is a hypocrite. Hey you Democrat, you say you favor the poor? Well you had darned well better BE poor or at least LIVE LIKE THE POOR, else you are full of sh*t.
You know the game is lost when guests who should know better tacitly accept the meme. Allow a guest to point out the stupidity of his premise, and this preppy twit would be turned into a babbling pile of silly putty in two minutes.
How many executives did Tucker Carlson have to blow to land the job he has? Someone must have told them "That guy SUCKS" and they took it literally.
FDR had a big house - or two - and there was no better!!!
One word: Franklin Delano Roosevelt...oops, that's three words. Tucker is a punk. The news media and political commentary in this country are a joke, only not funny. Send that twirp packing, and the sooner the better.
Uh... FDR AND LBJ both had large homes...
Tucker = Wanker
Oops, I guess that leaves out Donald Trump and Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and ... oh yeah, GW Bush.
Typical old money dislike for new money. Tucker's inherited wealth is somehow innately better than Edwards' earned wealth.
I've never understood the charge of "limosine liberal." How is calling for people in your own tax bracket to actually pay more taxes hypocritical? Doesn't that also mean that you yourself would be paying more?
House too big..?
Damn! An' I was all for votin' for the guy... sheesh.
Rudy, hold the bus!
Tucker alone at home with poppa's million dollar cane collection. That man-boy has a fever from way.... back and no-one can cure it..
I would LOVE for Rachel Maddow to take over from that nitwit, Carlson. But I heard that rumors of her making a deal with MSNBC are just that - rumors.
MSNBC must get rid of the smart-alec punk, and I hope they do so soon. They got rid of Savage, so should they get rid of Carlson, get someone with a brain that functions sans republican talking points.
What kills me about a$$holes like Carlson is that so many people on the political Right in this country deny that class exists. I actually heard Bob Novak crowing on Crossfire a while back about how the United States is a "classless" society.
Yet, by talking in such terms, Carlson is confirming the existence of class. The implication is that Edwards and other "rich liberals" can't possibly be concerned with those less off, because they possess a class consciousness that makes them incapable of feeling empathy for such people. Or, in FDR's case, he was labeled a "class traitor" because he came from money yet pursued policies that worked against (some of) the interests of his class.
So....if a poor person is a liberal, he's "envious" of the ruling class. If a person is a rich liberal, he's either a phony and/or a class traitor.
Either way, class is a reality that can't be avoided.
I don't get it. Probably never will. How do the biggies decide just which talentless lames should become "pundits" and get to blather away on their shows? They certainly make some peculiar choices. Imagine Tucker Carlson coming up to you at a party and talking his endless nonsense. Wouldn't you try to get away from him as quickly as possible? So why on earth would anybody think you would want to watch him on TV?
jacob @ 11:
Do we know that this is even true, or did "boy-with-bowtie" just conjure it out of his ass? I don't know, but 28,000 square feet would be a freakishly large house, even by Hollywood standards. Can we get a fact check on this?
I'd like to hang out with Tucker.
Not because he's cool or a good guy to hang out with. I like to look smart and I'm lazy.
Hanging out with Tucker, all I have to do is wait for him to open his mouth and I'll look smart by comparison. No effort (other than enduring his presence) required.
Wealth is the ultimate IOKIYAR
When I was in school, I never took anybodies lunch money - but in that little twerp's case, I might have made an exception - just to see him cry.
I had plenty to say, but other's have already said it so well.
I don't think the big lie about the 28000 foot house is gonna hurt JE nearly as much as the fact that his message isn't getting out. Most poor folks secretly (or openly - why else would anybody give a fuck about celebrity gossip?) admire the rich - especially a bootstraps kind of guy who made it honestly - taking on the establishment. The "Breck Girl" stuff now - that hurts. Hillary is a dyke; Edwards is a fag - they can't say it openly - but they know how to make sure it is out there. Ironically, half or more of those "macho" Republicans the bobbleheads swoon over have wide stances themselves.
The only question is - which millionaire is gonna be president?
A day might come when an ordinary (but intelligent) citizen might have a shot (as opposed to a dullard like W or a senile old actor like Rayguns) but we are nowhere close to that now.
"What’s even more frustrating is to see Bob Franken and Slate’s Melinda Henneberger play along with this foolishness. Henneberger says that while Elizabeth Edwards is a wonderful person that everybody loves, she’s the one who wanted the huge house and boy, that really runs counter to the message that she and her husband are trying to put out on the campaign trail."
Tucker knows how to play the game (read: double standards). In America, you just don't get anywhere putting someone down for their accumulation of wealth, whether it's Arbusto or Edwards. You can't. We're capitalist country. Accumulation of wealth is the name of the game and the goal of every true, red-blooded American. But he and Henneberger do have a point in identifying Edwards as a Cadillac liberal. He made his fortune as a plaintiff's attorney in huge lawsuits. It could be observed that his is a lot more honorable than having Daddy help you buy a baseball team then turn it around for a zillion times more than you paid for it. Edwards is a self-made multi-millionaire; Arbusto is a Daddy-made multi-millionaire. I always thought Arbusto's handlers (no doubt including Herr Karlheinz Roeff) put him up in a modest ranch house in Crawford to convince the TV audiences he is a man of simple means, a man of the people so to speak. After all, the next time he's down there, check out the background of the White House correspondents' broadcasts: an old beaten-up, falling down barn with some rusty plows and such. Reminds me of that SciFi movie about how NASA faked the moon landing.
RobertD @ 72:
Read comment #53. It's true.
Flush this turd already.
Tucker Carlson is one intellectually dishonest clown (remember his bow-tie?.) I bet we can find an amoeba with a higher IQ than this joker.
Him and Scarborough should be fired, or better yet, banned, and not just from MSNBC but from any mass media outlet, and not even for their right-wing beliefs --which are bad enough-- but for the sheer stupidity of their arguments and points.
Dump them. Now.
Tucker Carlson endorsed Ron Paul. And you should too. He'll get our troops out of Iraq.
Bush has a 1600 acre ranch but Tucker thinks that's fine. Double standards on the march. I'm sick of seeing Tucker and his Wonder Years haircut
UnEasyOne @ 77:
Right. That's my point.
FDR didn't live in an era of known global warming and natural habitat demise. Edwards built his house in such an age. No excuse for such gluttony and selfishness today. Kucinich's house is 1200 square feet.
do-si-do @ 49:
I'm sure you're right.
It's so true though. Being a very poor person at a major university I see it all the time. All the kids that have no money problems always have this "white people are evil and so it money" attitude, but the second you take their money away from them they change their tune.
They can afford to be whiny brats is the conclusion I have come to. How rich do you have to be to only accept "organic" food? (even though it's often inferior)
What I find even funnier is all these kids making trips to africa to help an orphan, when just the cost of their plane ticket could feed a family there for over a year.
repugs are ignorant. When did Dems take an oath of poverty.
Hillary's laugh, clothes, bustline
Obama's name, parents, religion
repugs are petty as hell.
This is how ignorant these conservatives are. A successful person can not fight against poverty because they are successful? That makes no freakin' sense.
I am at a loss for any other words. Ignorance has become rampant in our society today. It is no wonder that Bush has been able to fool us for so long.
Yeah, its ok for Mr Republican to have his 200 foot yacht but for a Democrat to have a big house, a really big house, is outrageous. Democrats are supposed to live like hobbits.
Fucker Carlson, one of the heirs to Swanson's Foods, is calling people who actually made money (unlike himself) to task. What a jerk-off and where's the bow tie?
For any one to question John Edwards' sincerity about fighting for the poor is complete ignorance. All you have to do is go see John speak in Iowa to know that he means what he says to his core. No other candidate gives me the feeling that they really believe what they say except for Edwards, and maybe Kucinich. John Edwards is the Real Deal.
This is a class issue. Those who are born to wealth and those who have to work for it. Otherwise, Tucker would see the absolute idiocy of his argument. Unless he is admitting that Bush has been a piss poor president, because he owns a large home.
This is the most assanine argument I've ever heard. FDR, one of the wealthiest men of his day, from one of the wealthiest families of the time, was the best president the poor and middle class ever had.
Some wealthy people are grasping, stingy, covetous fools, who are only concerned with their class, at the detriment of everyone else. They can, in their near sightedness, be down right sociopathic in their disregard for people outside of their circles. ie George Bush.
Other wealthy people can be quite generous, magnanimous, socially conscious, and wish to see all people succeed.
We are coming into some very hard times thanks to the shortsightedness and class oriented Bush administration, and the middle class are just now beginning to feel it. As FDR had to rescue the country after Hoover ran it into the ground, someone like John Edwards or Christopher Dodd will have to rescue it after Bush.
This issue screams "REPUBLICANS ARE IDIOTS." There is no way to twist logic enough to conclude that compassion is determined by home size.
try this... "how dare this Jesus speak of the poor and downtrodden !?? who does he think he is with all his heavenly wealth? my god he has a lot of nerve - what with his heavenly kingdom and the halls of his heavenly mansion -which are huge!!!. my goodness, the nerve of some people, why he's just a hypocrite!!!" ... sounds a little different now, don't it.
I guess since every president lives in the White House(which,if no one's noticed,isn't exactly tiny)there's NEVER been a president who cared for those who have less elaborate means.
God these people really think we're all as stupid as they are.
I would love to see an Edwards/Richardson ticket.
www.pafundi.com
Number of Operations Iraq Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 4349
Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his lovely wife Eleanor.... both rich white folks who are ordinary americans admire to this day. Both honored at our hallowed MALL in D.C. with other liberal champions.
Their New Deal liberalism rescued America from the REPUBLICAN Great Depression and crushed RIGHTWING fascism at home and abroad in WW2.
John & Elizabeth Edwards are the next Roosevelts and that's why the media is afraid of them
“If were a republican addressing a mixed audience, the last word I’d use would be “depression”.—FDR, whose liberal New Deal rescued America from the REPUBLICAN Great Depression and those dandy ,GOP-laissez-Faire “Hoovervilles”
“A radical is a man with both feet firmly planted — in the air. A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward. A reactionary is a somnambulist walking backwards. A liberal is a man who uses his legs and his hands at the behest of his head.”—FDR (father of modern american liberalism)
“Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a President and senators and congressmen and government officials, but the voters of this country.” ---FDR
I wish Edwards would use the FDR term "ECONOMIC ROYALISTS" as he did during the REPUBLICAN Great Depression.
The "Robber Baron" term rings too distant. That was refering to the Railroad Barons of 19th century.
FDR's term will invoke FDR's legacy and the New Deal successes.
Watch what cons DO, not what cons SAY !!! (Hypocrisy)
Exposing the CON in CONservative !!!
This is the garbage i get from people here in N.C. Well, look at the house Edwards lives in. He should not have built it and let himself open to this kind of talk and besides what does he do for poor people. This from people who live in $650,000 homes themselves.
There are 40+/- millionaires in the senate and 123+/- millionaires in the house. But John Edwards is the only one held accountable for being rich, though he earned it the hard way and he's the only one who apparently lives in a house with more than 1200 sq. ft.
I always tell people he did the right thing building in Chatham County. Chapel Hill has the best school system in the state and that is one good reason. The second is that when he is President the traffic in his old Raleigh neighborhood will not be disrupted. When it was the last time and the shoulders of the streets were mucked up he saw that they were fixed I believe out of his own pocket. I like a man who thinks ahead. Now the secret service and helicopters can land next to his house and any traffic delays will be from RDU and I40 headed West, not East.
C&L misses the point here....completely.
Republicans are proud of their greed and the big house is proof.
Liberals want fairness and environmental responsibility and the big house is a rebuke.
I'm a working class liberal who will never have that kind of cash. If I did, the Nature Conservancy would get a huge chunk, I'd be very content in my modest home.
The GOP has every right to show the disconnect between the words and deeds of Gore, Edwards, and the Hollywood greens like Streisand. Just as we relish in exposing the hypocrisy of the Party of Morality. The street runs both ways.
Will some real man please hit on Tucker so we can once again see him scream like a little girl and run to get a friend to try and help him beat the guy up?
Puss.
Marty has it right....
I'm a working class liberal, would love to see Kucinich get together with Obama...
This profound disjunction between the rhetoric and the life/lifestyle is offensive and, in a real way, dishonest.
I commend Edwards ability to square that circle (which is some feat indeed); but it is not what the country or the party needs now----
if Clinton or Edwards get the nom, I might not show up in 08...., and i think there are plenty out there who think likewise.
(really now, a 24 year bush/clinton legacy...)
Tucker Carlson reasons that an exceptionally wealthy person can't support or articulate a valid argument for "redistributive politics." Carlson forgets that only Nixon could go to China. In fact, due to Edward's modest upbringing and his phenomenal financial success, Edwards is the ideal candidate to run on a redistributive, populist platform. Edwards understand the middle class, and the corporate forces arrayed against them, because he’s witnessed it first hand, and he understands the fabulously wealthy because he has ascended into their celestial ranks. Edwards has been to both mountain tops. But he has transcended his immediate experiences and now sees the big picture for what it is. And that’s why he’ll be getting my vote.
This is a revised copy of the e-mail I sent MSNBC:
Hello,
I am a loyal MSNBC viewer. I even Tivo the MSNBC broadcast of Meet the Press instead of the NBC version. I simply wanted to thank you for developing the Rachel Maddow Show. I hope she replaces Tucker Carlson the kneejerk apologist. I don't mind bloviators. I watch Hardball all the time. I expect intellectual consistency, not poor ballroom dancing. Thank you.
Ahhh, jeez. It's a distraction - again. Every time they come up with a new talking point that distracts from the PURE, UNMITIGATED EVIL they are perpetrating against everyone not in their inner circle, it seems like we all respond with the intellectual depth of a 13 yr old with severe ADD.
We allow ourselves to be endlessly distracted by every piece of shiny trash they throw out of their getaway cars.
Focus, people! Carlson is irrelevant. Matthews, Beck, Limpdick, Savage, et al, are IRRELEVANT!! They only matter when they keep getting a rise out of the public - and so, today, Carlson matters to everyone posting here. What a waste.
There's a reason why we keep seeing the same intellectualy challenged dozen or so "experts" spewing nonsense, (all the above and Pat and Bay Buchanan, Joe - I didn't kill Lori Klausutis - Scarborough, Tim Russert, and all the Faux News idiots).
Because we respond to all their crap as if it had worth.
We are the majority. Stop watching them, stop giving them attention, stop feeding the beast.
Investigate, Indict, Impeach, Incarcerate!
i hate tucker, but the fact is, how can you live in a house like that and claim to speak for the poor ?
edwards is a such a fake
hillary 2008 !
this proves that the Right is very affraid of Edwards and his run for President. Anytime you see someone like Tucker (the Mud-slinger) out there talking his usual Bull-Shit,you can bet that the Edwards message is starting to catch on with the American People.
What is interesting about Tucker is he is a wonderful writer. I'd like to see him write more pieces instead of doing the t.v. commentary thing.
Tucker Carlson's mouth is too big.
Dearest Craig R.
I understand that Tucker is also a fabulous ballroom dancer.
thank goodness,
two weeks and the irrelevant and corrupt Edwards and Clinton will no longer be such pointless distractions...
Obama will be on his way
Aanya @ 48:
Actually, I read a while back, on a reputable website (which I can't recall at the moment) that Dubya's ranch was really constructed more or less like a movie set, just in time for him to have a place to go to "relax" from all the stress of his job as Preznit.
It's not a working ranch at all, not somehting that's been in the family - a facade built by taxpayers so GWB could look regal.....I'll see if I can find the website and post it.
Okay, I have to be honest, I was bothered about the Edwards' new digs because it was new construction and on property that allowed for it to be built 'green' utilizing every available alternative energy source. I think you lead by example and he clearly has the funds to have his place operate totally 'off the grid' and either it didn't occur to them or they chose not to do so.
Having said that, he is the only one of the top three that I would cast a vote for in the general election - if it's Clinton or Obama, I'll sit it out.
Have any of you thought (or researched) HOW Edwards paid for his 28,000 sq ft house? While many of you are holding the "American dream" flag up you don't really know what you're talking about. Edwards made millions suing hard working doctors, accusing them of CAUSING cerebral palsy. We know now that IS NOT TRUE and he knew it then. So if you want more frivolous lawsuits and lack of innovation (especially in healthcare) then vote for the guy that "cares about the little people" while he lives in his 28,000 sq ft house that he was a "crook and liar" to obtain. If you think that's "change" then you need some time with a health care professional. I'm for Obama.
Tucker's idiocy is the result of logic that conflates Edwards' thinking with socialism.
Who the hell watches that show?
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Brian Nichols @ 112:
Been getting talking points from Free Republic, have you?
From Wikipedia:
This was just ONE of his cases. The way our judicial system works, the JURY awarded the amount--not Edwards. And the doctors were liable for negligence--not causing cerebral palsy.
If this was your child, would you be as sneering?
Nicole Belle @ 116:
Of course, he wouldn't He'd be buying his lawyer a big steak dinner and toasting victory for taking that "hard working doctor" to task for f*cking up. Look...Everybody hates the other guys attorney.
"Millionaire trial lawyer"...Blah blah....$400 Haircut...Blah Blah...
If that's the best the opposition can do...I'll take that over "shrill bitch" or "closet black muslim" any day.
Dennis Kucinich can't win... can he?
* Dennis Kucinich recently won 76% of over 80,000 votes cast at IndependentPrimary.com
* Dennis Kucinich won 41% of the 15,800 votes in a poll by the Progressive Democrats of America. In this poll, he also came in first in the early primary states of New Hampshire and Iowa.
* In a Democracy for America poll with 154,000 votes (an organization founded by former Democratic Presidential candidate Howard Dean), Dennis Kucinich won 47 of 50 states, and almost 32% of the overall vote. He won Iowa and New Hampshire here, too.
* And finally, in a poll by The Nation magazine, Kucinich won first place with 35% of the vote.
Rep. Kucinich is the ONLY Presidential candidate calling for single-payer, not-for-profit healthcare (eliminating the need for for-profit insurance companies, premiums, co-pays, and deductibles), the only candidate who would create jobs while simultaneously involving every area of the government in environmental conservation and preservation (see his Works Green Administration plan, modeled after FDR's WPA), the only Democratic candidate who voted against the Patriot Act, the only Democratic candidate who has NEVER voted for the war or approved funding for the war, and he is the ONLY Presidential candidate who has even thought about impeaching the President and VP. And yes, he has plans to work with Rep. Wexler and others on re-introducing new articles of impeachment in the near future.
But the news networks would have you believe that he's at 1% and has no chance of winning. Let me tell you, WE decide. Not the media. Vote for you who you believe in, not who you perceive as having the best chance at winning. If you are still thoroughly convinced that he stands absolutely no chance, let me leave you with this adage:
"It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."
www.dennis4president.com
www.youtube.com/denniskucinich
[Please stop spamming threads with copy and paste posts. And watch your topic. I'm going back to delete your off topic commentary. Please read the Commenting Policy, and abide by its rules-Sitemonitor]
@Nicole Belle
I don't know what "Free Republic" is. Please get your facts straight-my information is from here: http://news.findlaw.com/newsmakers/john.edwards.html
And believe me, negligence and causing are equivalent in the court and to the plaintiff's attorney. And no, I wouldn't be sneering because I would choose a doctor that I trusted to do their best. But I guess caring and doing your best don't count for anything anymore in this society. I don't blame all my problems (or bad things that happen to me) on others.
If anyone thinks that a $25 million dollar verdict is okay, then please don't complain about the cost of a health care system in which more than half of all physicians admit that they order tests that aren't needed because they are afraid of getting sued.
@Johnny2Bad
Obviously, from your small-minded and extremely offensive comments, you troll every nasty vitriolic blog on the internet. I'm sorry you're so bitter about everything.
peace warrior @ 118:
First: sorry but online polls are crap. Second: Winning 41% of a straw poll of the hard core base (paid-up PDA members only, BTW) is hardly earth shattering.
That's what Huckabee is pulling on the Right and he can't win (in November) either.
I don't believe Edwards' house is a big deal, but the fact that he got two 400$ haircuts is hypocrisy at it's worst.
I feel sorry for all those people that trusted Edwards and gave him small gifts of 25, 50, 100, 200, or 300 dollars that they possibly couldn't afford...when their donation wouldn't even pay for just one haircut. 2 Americas indeed.
Brian Nichols @ 119:
Wow...Testy aren't we? So glad you have the means to "choose" a doctor you trust to do his. Not everyone is that fortunate.
Oh and I'm very sorry I offended your tender sensibilities.
NOT.
[Deleted. Off topic, thread spamming-Sitemonitor]
Keepingthemhonest @ 121:
Wow!!!!!!!! It took 120+ tries but we have the first "$400 Haircut" comment.
Yeaaaaaaaaaa. Congratulations!!!!
You're the winner on today's episode of Pathetic Wingnut Troll.
@Johnny2Bad
I'll take your troll bait. Andy why do you think that "Not everyone is that fortunate"? Could it be cost? Could it be because we have a healthcare system that awards $25 million verdicts? Who do you think pays for that? That's about the only thing you and I have in common: WE'RE paying for it. Good luck to you if you think Edwards will fix the very system that bought him that fortress.
Nicole Belle @ 116:
FYI, it appears edwards has taken multiple cases where he argued that doctors caused a baby to be born with CP. He made pretty good money as a lawyer, which explains the "compound".
Regarding the case in question, this DOES seem a little slimey...
the following quote is from this article.
Brian Nichols @ 125:
God. That's it? That's your best shot? Jeez, you're making it just too easy.
"The best attempt to synthesize the academic literature on medical malpractice is Tom Baker's The Medical Malpractice Myth, published last November. Baker, a law professor at the University of Connecticut who studies insurance, argues that the hype about medical malpractice suits is "urban legend mixed with the occasional true story, supported by selective references to academic studies." After all, including legal fees, insurance costs, and payouts, the cost of the suits comes to less than one-half of 1 percent of health-care spending. If anything, there are fewer lawsuits than would be expected, and far more injuries than we usually imagine."
(My emphasis)
yeah, John Edwards compound = 100 acres... George Bush's? 1600 acres.
Sounds about even, doesn't it? That's the handicap Republican's give themselves.
noitaluspacne @ 126:
Dude...linking to WorldNetDaily articles will only get you called out. Ya gotta be a lot less transparent than that.
A little effort, Billy Bob.
Paleeze.
noitaluspacne @ 126:
So? What's your point? To paraphrase Nicole, what if it were your kid? What if it were you? Do you know what the cost is to care for someone with cerebral palsy? The kind that puts one in a chair, unable to communicate? If these awardees are anything like my neighbour, it's 24/7 care with multiple skilled attendants. Should the government pay for her care if it's a doctor's fault?
Are you saying John Edwards isn't entitled to compensation for his expertise? Do you know all the person hours go into a legal case? How many people work on it? Their salaries, their education?
I thought not. And you and a bunch of other ignorant yahoos want to say what is 'excessive' compensation? Right. :roll:
@Johnny2Bad
YES! I KNEW you'd say that! Thank you!
The cost of medical malpractice is not merely the cost of malpractice + the cost of verdicts/settlements. A recent survey has shown that more than half of physicians have responded that "Some tests I'll order just in case. If I miss something, I could be hit with a malpractice suit." Read here: http://www.memag.com/memag/survey/surveyList.jsp?id=333339&answerId=5843
And if you had actually READ Tom Baker's book, you would realize that nowhere does he address this cancer - that the threat of lawsuits and $25 million verdicts has CHANGED the way medicine is practiced. If you think the effect of that is 1/2%, then you and George W need to work on your funny math. And I'll repeat: Good luck to you if you think Edwards will fix the very system that bought him that fortress.
miss_kitty @ 130:
Yep. OMG, even though total cost of suits is less than 1/2 of 1 percent of total HC spending they persist in spite of the facts.
Watch out for the Evil Lawyers.
We're doomed.
Arrggggggh.
miss_kitty @ 130:
And another thing-I have known since 7th grade, that if a woman is ready to give birth, and she's prevented from doing so, the time she is made to hold on to the baby is directly proportionate to the brain damage the baby will suffer, due to oxygen deprivation. 7th grade.
I would expect any medical doctor to know the same.
Brian Nichols @ 131:
Hey, "Brian". You're actually citing 222 web poll votes from a medical business management website (Here are its "Editorial Consultants") as your "proof"? Seriously??
I'm laughing out f*cking loud.
That's beyond pathetic.
well, tucker's only half-right.
edwards probably ought not be president, but that's mainly because he (like clinton, dodd and i believe biden) voted to authorize the iraqi quagmire.
seems to me, if you let the genie out out of the bottle, you ought not be placed in charge of stuffing him back in.
and you certainly can't seriously claim to deserve a promotion.
See in Tucker's world Bush is rich and conservative, but conservatives don't care about the poor or just about anyone else because it is every dog for itself. So people like Tucker have a hard time understanding how someone who is rich can actually give a damn about other people. Of course Edwards grew up not rich at all but that doesn't matter to these Darwinian economist types.
Brian Nichols @119 bloviated:
Bzzzzzzzt. Wrong. Big difference. When you're negligent you allow something to happen, causing it, well, you cause it.
I'll take my chances with Edwards' gazillion square foot house as opposed to Mitt's or Rudy's or Huck's shotgun shacks any day, thank you very much...
This dumbass is still on the air?
Pretty crazy hypocrisy too. So, success is bad now for republicans? And a self-made man too, rather than a rich brat with a trust fund. Does a less expensive house make for a better president? The number of sheltered rich jerks that buy into this argument is telling.
And Tucker calls this, and the idea of philanthropy a "mental illness". Wow.
You know what the poor want in this country? A nice house. A good job. Enough cash left over to eat well and send the kids to college. I think we should elect a guy that started poor and worked his way through college. And got a good job. And a nice house.
And now wants to give a little back and make that possible for the rest of us. So far, I haven't heard any actual poor people interviewed about this... but it's not like Tucker and the rest actually give a shit about the poor, they just like the twittering gossip. That, and because they know what poor people would do if they made that much money. (Build a nice house! Duh.)
lopaloo102 @ 138:
What the hell are you talking about? Seriously?
Anyway, Edwards polls the best of the Democrats versus Republicans. You are quite full of it. If you are trying to make hay from the vote to authorize the president to use the military if we were threatened, get over it. He explained why he made that decision, and that he'd since learned it was wrong.
No one -- NO ONE -- knew just how corrupt Bush and Cheney had made the government, including all the intelligence agencies that mislead congress (and us). Some of us suspected as much, and voiced our concerns (including myself), but the problem isn't that the president can use force. It is that the public elected a VERY untrustworthy president in the first place. It turns out he couldn't be trusted with that power, and that is sad. But let's face it: that is mostly OUR fault -- the voters. We put him there in a position of authority where he could lie to people, and force others to lie for him (including Colin Powell). And congress should be psychic?
I trust a man that learns from mistakes, not one that claims never to have made one.
@Johnny2Bad
http://cgood.org/healthcare-reading-cgpubs-polls-6.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3230/is_n9_v21/ai_7952867
The results of a 2 minute google search.
1/2 of 1% my ass. You can spew your pro-lawyer sewage all you want, but the bottom line is we're talking about a healthcare system that is 2x the cost of any other country with many worse outcomes (i.e. infant mortality and life expectancy). And if you actually read the above links and listen to doctors and nurses, you will find that all of them are spending more time doing paperwork and ordering extra tests due to the threat of a lawsuit. Which means less time spent with a patient. Which means more medical errors. I'm not laughing out loud as you are because I'm sad that you can be so polarized and ignorant at the same time.
Edwards and Clinton want to MANDATE health insurance. Read: force you and me to pay United Healthcare et al to make more than the $3 billion in profit that United Healthcare made last year. Solution? I think not. Doctors need to be more accountable TO THE MEDICAL BOARD for negligence. Patients need to have an avenue to recover from bad outcomes (due to negligence or not). For example, "bad outcome" insurance would be a step in the right direction. It would pay for the increased costs and hardship associated with an injury in a reasonable manner not involving attorneys. But the trial lawyers want none of that! And attorneys need to be more accountable and penalized for filing frivilous cases. The number one increase in costs in medical malpractice in the last 5 years is the "threat" of a lawsuit. An attorney threatens a lawsuit without ever intending to take it to trial with the hope that he/she will get a settlement. If not, they just drop the case the day before trial, costing the defendant (and healthcare system) in many cases more than $100,000 in preparation fees. And then the most important person, the injured person, gets NOTHING for their time and money and hopes. How is that a good system?
"Medicare for all" is the only reasonable way we can keep healthcare costs down. And allowing doctors and nurses to spend time with patients - not paperwork - is the only way to increase the quality of healthcare and reduce errors. And when errors happen, we need to have a system that does not take 4 years to complete and awards $25 million dollars in a single case. Insurance companies do not improve health care. Lawyers do not improve health care. Why are we letting each of them increasingly impact how health care is delivered?
So go ahead, Johnny2Bad, use a bunch of filthy language with no thought behind it, just bias. You are obviously so close minded that no argument will convince you that you are wrong. Prove me wrong - what's YOUR solution?
There is NO reason to promote Tucker Carlson here - why do you help him? He loves it when you publish him here. The man is on the cancellation chopping block. Let him go quietly.
Site Monitor: The site is called Crooks and Liars. Tucker qualifies.
Oh, and Tucker - fuck you for the comment about "jacuzzi cases" 'cuz, like, people died in water that had nothing to do with Jacuzzis.
Anybody reading here who went to Trinity College in Ct, please track Tucker down and put him back in his comfortable family cage.
Thanks.
And Carlson can never be president because his brain is too small.
Edwards could always downsize his house.
miss_kitty @ 130:
Here, I'll break them down for you...
Point 1:
He made a lot of money as a trail lawyer, so of course he has the money to throw around on a big house (the media likes to call these things "compounds" when painting someone in a bad light).
Point 2: (In response to nichole)
Yes, the negligence which resulted in the baby having CP. Edwards also argued multple cases dealing with doctors causing a baby to have CP, not one.
Point 3:
His argument in this particular case was a little slimey.
Preacher Boob @ 142:
Brian Nichols @ 140:
Again, great work. A "two minute" search that took you nearly an hour to post. It shows. Prove you wrong?? Show me something (anything) that makes your case.
Again, linking to medical business management website "polls" don't cut it. Your Harris Interactive Poll asks about doctors and nurses "feelings" "fears" and "perceptions" then extrapolates conclusions based on those answers. But where's the beef? Point out the actual costs incurred by these etherial measurements.
Point to one real study (Not just from a crap science "web poll" or the anecdotal BS you're trying to sell) that says the "fear of litigation" is the "number one increase in medical costs in the last five years." Facts, "Brian", prove argument...not the world according to you and your "web polls".
Waiting.
noitaluspacne @ 143:
Let me break it down for you: Three words about your research on "Point 3": World Net Daily. Nuff said.
noitaluspacne @ 143:
Yeah I don't get that. How is it slimy? Pretty direct if you ask me. He IS the representative of her. A dead person. His sole function is to act as her agent to right the wrong that was done to her. That's kind of how things work. If you think THAT is slimy, wow. You live a sheltered (from lawyers anyway) life.
BTW, here's a link I found to a large picture of the "house" in question (supposedly. from a conservative blog). Sure are a lot of people right here on C&L that have bitch about this issue without even seeing it! Talk about bad judgement.
As you can see, it really IS a lot of hallway -- the hallway is longer than the large house itself!. It appears to actually be 3 buildings, a white building that is actually a duplex with each half having a garage, and a large barn-like facility that looks like a recreation center or office building. Next to Bush's crazy Waco-cult complex, or John Kerry's house it looks kind of normal size to me.
I do wonder what the red building is for though. But eyeballing the size of each duplex based on the cars NOT including the hallway or garages... looks like about 40' x 50' each. Or 2000 square feet on the ground floor, smallish or average. 4000 if you count them as one house, which is large (I think 2500 is about average these days). But considering that there are at least 5 cars near the house and a full parking lot at the red building... either this picture is wrong, or Edwards is getting a bum rap. If you build a rec center and let lots of other people use it, I don't think that should count as your home. Or is that a business? Anyway, this whole issue looks like a pile of bullshit to me that more than a few Dems swallowed willingly -- sight unseen. Hope you liked the taste...
Not that it matters... hell he could live in the Taj Mahal or the Batcave for all I care. If he's willing to clean up government and start fixing the corporate interests on K street dictating everything, I'm all for him.
@Johnny2Bad
I work for a living. And I'm working today and had to take a few phone calls.
Go to sickoflawsuits.org
My guess is you're a lawyer, so I'm sure you'll love it.
Here's your facts:
PricewaterhouseCoopers calculates that medical liability concerns increase annual health care spending by $124 billion in 2006 dollars. The additional cost of liability-based health care costs adds 3.4 million Americans to the rolls of the uninsured. (“Jackpot Justice: The True Cost of America’s Tort System,” Pacific Research Institute, March 27, 2007)
Ten percent of every dollar spent on health care is attributed to the costs of liability and defensive medicine. (“The Factors Fueling Rising Healthcare Costs 2006” PriceWaterhouseCoopers, January 2006)
An estimated $50 billion per year is spent on unnecessary test procedures designed primarily to guard doctors and hospitals against malpractice claims. (Fear of Litigation Study, Conduced by Harris Interactive, Final Report, April 11, 2002)
Of course, you just argue, argue, argue. I'm looking forward to YOUR solution.
Waiting.
Listen to yourselves people. You are fighting amongst yourselves defending and attacking a LAWYER. The man made millions LYING in a courtroom, because that is what lawyers do. They lie. A lot. Then you are attacking each other to prove that it the legal battles that make American healthcare unaffordable. Well, if it isn't, what is then? Canada's isn't perfect, but we don't have multiple daily lawsuits in the courts, and STILL pay LESS than our American neighbours. Why is that? And dear God people, what is so damn special about this millionaire lawyer, that you think that he is going to be the US saviour? He is a rich lawyer. That isn't an American dream. That is a person that lies convincingly. You want another one of those as Prez? Haven't you had enough of that shit?
swarmofkillermonkeys @ 147:
She wasn't dead. She had CP.
It seems a little slimy to win your case by preying on peoples emotions not not relying on "just the facts".
Login or Register to post comments.