Free Republic

Did anyone hear Chris Matthews? He thought his mike was off and gave a disadainful ‘oh godddd” as Jindal approached the camera”.

I have NO PROBLEM with getting a "receipt" from the machine, but to imply as the New York times does that the real threat to the integrity of our elections is the machines and not fake voters is quites simply not true.

The New York times Editorial today webs weaves the usual paranoid conspiracy theories about the Diebold voting machines because (horror!) some executives donated to Republican candidates. They imply the company may be rigging elections for republicans and demand the computers give a paper trail to confirm the votes are accurately tabulated. As anyone in the computer world know, "garbage in, garbage out" - would it also be prudent to have a paper trail on those actually casting the ballots to ensure they are indeed registered voters? They are thousands upon thousands of documented cases of voter fraud (involving millions of votes) that requiring an ID would eliminate, and there is NOT ONE SINGLE INSTANCE of voter fraud from rigged computers, but the times is more worried about the computers. Why? Oh yeah - I forgot - because it is racist to ask for an ID to vote (just curious - are the airlines racist when they ask for ID multiple times when you fly?)

You have proved thru your personal attacks and poorly reasoned arguments an old legal saying : If you have the facts, argue the facts. If you have the law, argue the law. If you have neither, bang the table. You two attorneys have done a wonderful job of banging the table. No facts, no law, just noise.....

Actually, those were not violins you were hearing, it was an ambulance siren. You better get running before another one of your selfless lawyers beats you to that cash cow!

Good night sniffer - lol!!!!!!!!!!
If you ever work for a living let me know - lol!!!!!

good try BD - not an ER doc. Required by hosp to take 5 days of call a month, but take call every day because of lack of accessibility of my specialty care in our area. Dont use a collection agency - very low rate of return and patients turned over threaten lawsuits even though they have paid nothing for their care. Not worth it. "And I think to myself, what a wonderful world...."

Well, I must turn in - work tomorrow.
Good luck chasing down your ambulances.
Hopefully tort reformed into obsolescense in the near future - out state is getting close.
I guess we doctors are a bit odd getting up in the middlw of the night to care of those who cant afford a piddling $5, let alone $5000. But thank god for them. They not only care for those in need but they provide you a living.
And god forbid you need their services, they will be their for you. And when they return you to health, you will be right back on the streets trying to destroy them the next day. It is kind of odd, but you know what? I kind of like it - I could not get up every morning sniffing for $$. In our profession we refer to you as bottom feeders with good reason. I feel you make a deal with the devil to do what you do to people you know are innocent - no qualms destroying them for a buck. I hope you see the light one day but I kind of doubt it. Best wishes.

BTW, I treated an attorney one nightwho sued my wifes partner. He could not believe I was doing it. He shook my hand afterwards and said how much he appreciated it. Other MD's in town shun him. He is a little too high profile to fly under the radar (TV, full page back of the phone book). But I am sure if given the chance he'd sue me out of practice in a heartbeat.

Sigh - are you a good lawyer? Not a good debater. did not suggest more suits- merely stated you guage your interest in suits based on whats in it for you. $ $ $.
Sorry, but you can't deny it. You know the funny thing is you could sue me all day long and I would still treat oyu when you show up in the ER and treat you the same as if you were family, even if you could not pay. That's what a professional does. But if you want to sue me for vindictiveness, hey, thats you.

Lol. Unforuntately, to quote you directly "answers, which can only be gotten through a lawsuit" - it is you who is advocating that bad results mandate a lawsuit to get "answers". Lets jam the courts with lawsuits and watch the doctors scurry to the interstate to more friendly states (i.e. Indiana). You want the big $$$$. just be man enough to admit it. You don't want piddling $5000 verdicts - not worth your time. Bring on the big bucks sympathy cases - that is what you crave. I have enough relatives who are lawyers who tell me malpractice from horror stories of ethics gone wild. If you are proud of the John Edwards "Channelers" of the world, defend your profession. Can you honestly say that in court you are trying to present the MD fairly or are you trying to make him look like a heartless incompentent bastard?

BTW, for a lawyer you are a little sloppy. Read your post 212 again. You never used the words "not a likely recovery". You said "limited recovery" - again - not enough $$ to interest you. You judge your cases not on the likelihood of winning, but on the likelihood of winning enough $ to make it worthwhile. That is your thought process - you are a lawyer- defend it, don't deny it.

Your whole post was about money, money, money. That is how lawyers think, not doctors (thank god). If money were the sole object, doctors would not do much of the work we do. Read your last post again. $, $, $. Did I miss something? While you may find my arguments all over the place, you are admirably consistent. $, $, $. Thats it.

by the way Mr. K - you did that research in 20 minutes.
Not as hard as everyone madeit sound.

Thank you Mr. K- -my entire point - research first then sue - not vice versa.

You know IJ, you in your own words did not say it was hopeless, you just said you just said you could not make much money (250 k verdict max for 150k invested). We take on many times more than 150k a year in write offs for uninsured and underinsured and don't call those cases "worthless" or and give them any less diligence. And our bonus is that you are their salivating if anything goes wrong (bad outcome = call lawyer). You are not going to roll the dice with your $$ unless you think you will win. We take care of people for nothing every day and put on our money and livelihoods on the line doing it - you know why ? - because we give a damn. I have treated a number of malpractice atty's and their families in my practice because their people - I think you guys forget that about doctors - we are just a means to a financial end for you.

Medical literature are what subject? Open you eyes and look at what is happening to OB/GYN in this country - 40% of OB's now traing are foreign grads - the highest by far in any specialty. Shortages in many states. Nobody want to put their livelihood in the hands of the lottery mentality malpractice system in this country, esp. in high risk specialities like OB. If you like the big suits - defend those. If you like a lot of well trained OB's (My wife trained in a top ten university hosp) defend that. But you are not going to have both......In our town 30% of OB/Gyn's have stopped deleivering babies in the last 3 years with more planning on following suit. The hospital is trying to recruit new grads with zero success thus far...

IJ - Its all about money for you my friend. Cases without much money are "worthless" - your words. -doctors take on cases all the time they know they will spend a long time on and never see a dime (and may still be sued for to boot). Whose got the patients interest at heart?

Our malpractice sytem is broke. Nobody interested in answers - only $$. Once the discovery process is invoked, the MD is hosed. Increased malpractice rates or losing insurance altogether one strike and out now for many major insurers, time away from practice, lost revenue, and an an attorney interested in gotcha. They want to win and win bad. They are not interested in the truth. Our system is all about money and not about justice and the truth.

Our malpractice sytem is broke. Nobody interested in answers - only $$. Once the discovery process is invoked, the MD is hosed. Increased malpractice rates or losing insurance altogether one strike and out now for many major insurers, time away from practice, lost revenue, and an an attorney interested in gotcha. They want to win and win bad. They are not interested in the truth. To get answers, a malpractice attorney is the wrong place to go.