Looks like its Edwards


PDA






targetshootr
July 6, 2004, 08:58 AM
I think Kerry made the right pick. Where does he stand on gun control?

If you enjoyed reading about "Looks like its Edwards" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BeLikeTrey
July 6, 2004, 09:08 AM
I thought Edwards was a decent Dem. Guess not, to be teaming up with this piece of excrement.

KMKeller
July 6, 2004, 10:00 AM
John Edwards has been, since his first day on the job, a political climber who's used his office as a North Carolina Senator as a springboard to higher office. He's now accomplished exactly what he intended to do all along. He has spent his entire tenure as Senator, drawing his salary from the people of North Carolina, and doing very little related to the position he received the pay for.

He's the worst kind of horse crap.

El Tejon
July 6, 2004, 10:02 AM
Kirk, tell us how you realy feel.:D

Edwards is handsome enough to help with the soccermommies. Should help in the 'burbs.

Boats
July 6, 2004, 10:08 AM
Oh goodie, Johnny Ketchup and the Boy Blunder.

capt_happypants
July 6, 2004, 10:11 AM
No record.

Great hair.

Oh my God, he's the Dan Quayle of the 21st Century!

Andrew Rothman
July 6, 2004, 10:11 AM
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Edwards_Gun_Control.htm

I grew up in the rural South. Everyone around me hunted, everyone had guns. I respect and believe in people's Second Amendment rights. That does not, however, mean that somebody needs an AK-47 to hunt. It does not mean that somebody who's been convicted of a violent crime should be able to walk out of prison, walk across the street and buy a gun. It does not mean that we shouldn't take every step that we can take to keep guns safe and keep guns out of the hands of kids. So, my belief is, first, I defend people's Second Amendment rights, but I don't think it's without limit.


I think we should extend the Brady Bill, which is set to expire. I think that we need to close forever the gun-show loophole, [to avoid criminals] buying a gun. I think it does make sense to have trigger locks for the purpose of keeping guns safe from children.

Oh, yeah. He's our guy.

Ed
July 6, 2004, 10:18 AM
When is the Brady bill up for extension?

Partisan Ranger
July 6, 2004, 10:27 AM
Any pol who uses the words "guns' and "you don't need" in the same sentence is not our friend.

I will tolerate instant background checks where I buy from an FFL. But any attempt to further regulate gun shows, or 'ban' guns that some XXXhole uses in a crime, is an absurd and unconstitutional violation of our God-given rights.

targetshootr
July 6, 2004, 11:03 AM
They should put the VP debate on pay-per-view. Should be a real smackdown.

WilderBill
July 6, 2004, 11:10 AM
I think that sKerry has made the very best choice he could to help him gain votes.
I don't beleive he is about to gain any here, however.

Lone_Gunman
July 6, 2004, 11:21 AM
Edwards was about as good a choice as he could make, but I still think he will lose.

The Democrats were dumb to pick Kerry over Edwards as their presidential candidate. The last time a liberal democrat from the North East won a presidential election was 40 years ago.

Liberal Democrat Yankees don't run well in the south. Edwards will not help anywhere but maybe NC.

I think Bush will sweep the south.

If they had picked Edwards, they might have picked up a couple of southern states, but would have still done just as well in the North East.

Edwards just wasn't liberal enough for the people running the Democratic Party.

BeLikeTrey
July 6, 2004, 11:25 AM
I found this info on an email from a friend...

Sen. John Kerry keeps talking about U.S. corporations leaving this country and setting up shop in foreign countries, taking thousands of American jobs with them. He is right, because that has happened. However, he is trying to blame it on George W. Bush. As far as I know, Bush has not moved one factory out of this country because he is not the owner of a single factory. That cannot be said about Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz-Kerry. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Kerry's own 32 factories in Europe and 18 in Asia and the Pacific. In addition, their company, the Heinz Company leases four factories in Europe and four in Asia. Also, they own 27 factories in North America, some of which are in Mexico and the Caribbean. 80% of Heinz products are made overseas. I wonder how many hundreds of American workers lost there jobs when these plants relocated in foreign countries. I also wonder if the workers in Mexico and Asia are paid the same wages and benefits as the workers in the United States. Of course they're not. However, Kerry demands that other companies that relocate should pay the same benefits they did in the U.S. Why does he not demand this of the Heinz Company, since he is married to the owner? If Kerry is elected, will he and his wife close all those foreign factories and bring all those jobs back to America? Of course they won't. They're making millions off that cheap labor!

feedthehogs
July 6, 2004, 12:02 PM
Don't confuse small minds with the facts now.

obiwan1
July 6, 2004, 12:05 PM
It doesn't matter where he stands. The Veep is just a figurehead anyhow. He won't have any effect on policy.

KMKeller
July 6, 2004, 12:13 PM
El T - I really was holding back... There are children present and Art's Grammaw would be after me with a hickory switch.

halvey
July 6, 2004, 12:31 PM
Big deal. No suprise.

Bruce H
July 6, 2004, 01:14 PM
Well at least he picked a product liability and personal injury lawyer. Holding true to form he is on both sides of the issue again.

ACORN
July 6, 2004, 01:17 PM
I think the fact that he thinks the second amendment is about hunting says all that needs to be said.

Waitone
July 6, 2004, 01:56 PM
Edwards is a member of the plantiff's bar (AKA evil trial lawyers).

Edwards campaign was supported and extended beyond a reasonable time to quit by fellow trial lawyers.

His run for the presidency which began before his senatorial seat was warm is designed for one purpose and one purpose only. The next phase in public policy in this country is to begin the process of litigation reform. John Edwards purpose is to have a seat at the table when the terms of litigation reform is being negotiated. Civil litigation is a monsterously expensive enterprise. We are literally rearranging our economy to avoid liltigation. Meanwhile, the kinds of suits being filed are increasingly irrational and can not stand up to the scrutiny of common sense.

Edwards job is to make sure corrective legislation does not harm the industry known as trial lawyers.

CarlS
July 6, 2004, 02:22 PM
This was a move to garner Southern votes as someone posted above. I hope these Southern voters remember that Kerry said the Democratic Party does not need the South to win.

Akurat
July 6, 2004, 02:41 PM
Cheney is going to tear this guy apart. Absolutely no experience. But as the media was so quick to point out this morning, he is pretty. :p

RWK
July 6, 2004, 03:05 PM
Perhaps the biggest looser in Kerry’s selection is Hillary Clinton. By picking Edwards:
(a) If Kerry is elected, Edwards (as the VP) has four or eight years in the national spotlight to prepare for his Presidential run.
(b) If Bush is reelected, Edwards is pre-selected as the CENTRIST Democrat candidate: popular, charismatic, with a good sense of humor, and the ablity to raise funds. In essence, Senator Clinton antithesis in several of these key categories.

fletcher
July 6, 2004, 03:56 PM
John Edwards has been, since his first day on the job, a political climber who's used his office as a North Carolina Senator as a springboard to higher office. He's now accomplished exactly what he intended to do all along. He has spent his entire tenure as Senator, drawing his salary from the people of North Carolina, and doing very little related to the position he received the pay for.

Pretty much sums it up...


Time to buy your assault weapons while you can, I'm afraid our respite will be short :(

RatFink
July 6, 2004, 04:00 PM
"Personal Injury Attorney"


I really don't think anything else needs to be said.

ACORN
July 6, 2004, 05:17 PM
Perhaps the biggest looser in Kerry’s selection is Hillary Clinton. By picking Edwards:
(a) If Kerry is elected, Edwards (as the VP) has four or eight years in the national spotlight to prepare for his Presidential run.
(b) If Bush is reelected, Edwards is pre-selected as the CENTRIST Democrat candidate: popular, charismatic, with a good sense of humor, and the ablity to raise funds. In essence, Senator Clinton antithesis in several of these key categories

I think this is a good reason for Bush to breathe a bit easier tonight. I don't think the Klintons will "let" Kerry win.

targetshootr
July 6, 2004, 05:18 PM
They keep saying this will be a close election but I have my doubts. It doesn't bode well when big name republicans are concerned about their own VP hurting the ticket. Sure, the 'base' love him because he throws them red meat but getting booed at baseball games says a whole lot more. I bet its gonna be one and done, like father like son. :)

Akurat
July 6, 2004, 05:51 PM
Actually it was a mixture of cheers and boos(as always), the cheers being just as audible as the booing. :fire: I love the spin you put on it though.. Keep reaching. :rolleyes:

And which "big name Republican" has had anything negative to say about Cheney, much less be "concerned with him hurting the ticket"? :rolleyes: Enlighten us Mr. targetshootr..

Also, you asked in your original post where Edwards stands on Gun Control... :confused:

Shanghai McCoy
July 6, 2004, 05:59 PM
Well I think President Bush will be a "one term wonder" too and no one who knows me would consider me any kind of liberal type person.What I am now wondering about know is if Hillary can be appointed to the supreme court during a Kerry presidency?Anyone else out there have any thoughts on this...

Monkeyleg
July 6, 2004, 07:19 PM
This was no surprise at all, considering that Kerry needed a way to get Southern votes.

However, Edwards' record will be a feeding frenzy. During his run for the senate, someone asked him a question regarding Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Edwards replied, "who?"

Let's face it, any woman--or man, for that matter--vapid enough to vote for Edwards because of his looks would probably be voting for Kerry anyway.

So, for the Democrat ticket, we have a gigalo and a trial lawyer. Yep, appeals to me. :barf:

targetshootr
July 6, 2004, 07:52 PM
Enlighten us Mr. targetshootr..

Well I'll try. Cheney's 'negatives' are higher than ever. As most would concede, his ties to the CIA agent leak and to Haliburton and his insistance on repeating the Iraq/911 lie will surely hurt him and Bush's chances in November. On the other hand, dumping him would cause even more harm at this point so they have to dance with who brung 'em which is good news for the Dems. Lots of ground to be plowed.

Hope that hepted. :)

sumpnz
July 6, 2004, 08:09 PM
You know, I really don't like Bush, and I like Kerry even less. But if Bush were to dump Cheney and replace him with Rice I could probably hold my nose enough to vote for him. Having Rice so posed to make her own bid for the presidency would have made the race against H. Clinton sooo much more interesting. Had the Dems nominated Edwards, depending on a number of factors, I might have been willing to at least consider voting for him (though I probably still would not have done so). On gun rights my impression is that Edwards is bad, but Bush isn't that much better so I don't think the difference there would be enough to be a show stopper.

CarlS
July 6, 2004, 08:28 PM
Well I'll try. Cheney's 'negatives' are higher than ever. As most would concede, his ties to the CIA agent leak and to Haliburton and his insistance on repeating the Iraq/911 lie will surely hurt him and Bush's chances in November. On the other hand, dumping him would cause even more harm at this point so they have to dance with who brung 'em which is good news for the Dems. Lots of ground to be plowed.

1. The so called CIA leak was not a leak. She was not and had never been an operative. That was blown out of proportion by the liberal press. I wonder why the press doesn't dwell as much on Kerry's efforts to gut the CIA budget?

2. What is wrong with Haliburton? They are a legitimate company - and not an oil company by the way.

3. What is the Iraq/911 lie you are referring to?

The only good news in this that I see for the dems is the people that choose to believe this crap.

targetshootr
July 6, 2004, 08:43 PM
The only good news in this that I see for the dems is the people that choose to believe this crap.

Choosing not to believe them doesn't make them untrue. I know a guy who hangs around my gunsmiths' shop who insists the moon landings were a total fabrication. I have no idea why he chooses to believe that, I can only guess it fits into a larger belief of some kind.

CarlS
July 6, 2004, 09:11 PM
Choosing not to believe them doesn't make them untrue. nor does choosing to believe them make them true.

another okie
July 6, 2004, 09:35 PM
So it's two rich white male lawyers from the U.S. Senate against two rich white businessmen from Texas. Now there's diversity for you!

jAK-47
July 6, 2004, 11:47 PM
Edwards said,

"That does not, however, mean that somebody needs an AK-47 to hunt."

No problem, I don't use my AK to hunt; fending off predators is quite another thing though.

It doesn't matter anyway - I doubt that Mrs. Heinz will be going to the White House, even after jumping on another horse after her first one died. What a "pickle puss" (pun intended).

OK - I lied. Last year, just to aggravate my cousin/godson (now in Iraq), I used my 103K to hunt deer. He just snarled at me and shouldered his 30.06... BTW, all we saw was a momma bear and LOTS of deer poop.

jAK-47

DigMe
July 7, 2004, 02:07 AM
. oops

brad cook

DigMe
July 7, 2004, 02:11 AM
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=1103052

Wow! They appear to be very fond of each other. I guess it's good to like your running mate.

:evil:

brad cook

S_O_Laban
July 7, 2004, 02:52 AM
Well I for one am very disapointed with Kerry's choice of running mate... I was hoping that Kerry would do what St Louis voters (both the dead and living:D ) have failed to do.... get Dick Gephart the h#ll out of MO.:banghead: Aw well ... now back to regular programing..

Sean Smith
July 7, 2004, 11:10 AM
Superficially, it was a smart choice. Kerry is a hard-left New England Yankee, and he needed a running mate to make him seem less hard-left and less Yankee by association.

That said, I don't think it will matter either way. His ideology notwithstanding (which I despise), Kerry was probalby the weakest candidate the Democrats could have come up with out of their primary... an extreme left-wing Democrat with no personality and no subjective appeal whatsoever is a losing proposition. Unless, of course, Bush bungles his campaign and/or something really horrible happens between now and the election that he gets blamed for.

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 11:33 AM
Unless, of course, Bush bungles his campaign and/or something really horrible happens between now and the election that he gets blamed for.

If you consider a four year term as a long campaign, or a probation period, he's done most of the damage already. Regardless of the opponent, has he passed the muster? It seems to me we're in worse shape in most every category than we were four years ago. I would certainly replace anyone who performed as poorly, no matter his excuses.

The Rabbi
July 7, 2004, 12:42 PM
Some of the posts here have been incredible. Does anyone think that "Pres. Gore" would have had the guts to go after terrorists by waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq? No. Does anyone think that Pres. Gore could have gotten Ghaddafi to disarm and "play nice" by negotiating with him? No. Does anyone think that Pres. Gore would have lowered taxes? No.
So now we have a Dem running who is the most clueless liberal since Dukakis, teemd with the most inexperienced VP candidate since Ferraro. His entire platform seems to be doing things that have failed already, like involving the UN in every foreign policy decision we make.
Americans are patriotic people. In every poll Bush and the Republicans come out ahead on foreign policy issues. We have not even had the conventions yet so polls on the candidates are misleading. Come November this will be a wipe-out.

BeLikeTrey
July 7, 2004, 12:54 PM
Well said...

sumpnz
July 7, 2004, 02:30 PM
Come November this will be a wipe-out. Yeah, but which way. I know the media will try to spin everything away from Bush's favor, but all of the polls done recently (and lets face it, no matter the conventions we know who the nominees are) are putting Kerry at least even with Bush if not ahead by a statistically significant margin. In a number of ways I don't like Bush, but I do believe Kerry would be worse. However I'm not very confident that predictions of a Bush landslide victory are going to prove accurate. Heck, I don't know at this point if Bush will even win, let alone by a big margin.

Here a question for those of you that really follow voting patterns and such. In which states is Bush essentially guaranteed victory, and which states are certain to go to Kerry. Of the remainder (the swing states) which do you think are more likely to swing to Bush, and which to Kerry? Once you've figured all that out how would the electoral votes stack up? My guess is that whoever wins will do so with less than 300 electoral votes (268 is the magic number to win).

There are too many "not-Bush" voters out there for Kerry to implode like Dukakis or McGovern. It would be great to see people voting for who that thought most represented their views rather than some emotional reaction to some "evil" Republican.

DigMe
July 7, 2004, 02:43 PM
Rabbi,

Exactly. I had to laugh yesterday when I heard Ralph Nader on a radio talk show saying that if he had been president Saddam would have also been out of power by now, three years into his presidency. When asked how he would have done that he said something like "by undermining his power." Huh? He said he would get together with other nations and encourage the Kurds and other oppressed groups to overthrow Saddam. Yeah...I'm sure that would've happened. Wake up and smell reality.

brad cook

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 03:51 PM
Some of the posts here have been incredible. Does anyone think that "Pres. Gore" would have had the guts to go after terrorists by waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq?

'Incredible' is really over the top but thanks anyhow. :)

I think we can safely say no one other than Bush and his cohorts would have dragged us into Iraq, an act that should disqualify him for reelection. Of course a lot of people believe we went there because they were involved in 911. Fortunately, the percentage of people who believe that one is on the decline.

There was a time when a politician would resign or decline to be nominated over such things (Nixon, LBJ) so you'd think the incredibly negative things in the books that have recently come from former employees would be enough of a reason for Bush to step down but not for these boys. They suffer from acute Imperial Hubris.

The Rabbi
July 7, 2004, 05:17 PM
Things in NC aint been the same since Jesse left......:(

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 06:07 PM
True, but that's a good thing. Jesse was a hateful ol' sumbich. On the other hand, Bush leads here by 47% to 42% as of today. Bad news is, his national job dissapproval rating is 48% while his job approval is 45%.

DigMe
July 7, 2004, 08:26 PM
Ahhh, the love affair continues...

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=1104596

Edwards looks like a sloppy kisser.

brad cook

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 09:34 PM
Edwards looks like a sloppy kisser.

I have to say I really don't care one way or the other on that point. :)

Kerry is pretty bad in many ways. Cheney too, Bush three. Edwards would be the best president of the lot. He's already stomping Cheney in one on one polling, which figures.

The Rabbi
July 7, 2004, 09:41 PM
You must live on Planet Chapel Hill because no one else in that state thinks like that.
Edwards is a creature of the trial lawyers, those beings that suck the blood out of American businesses. They have cost more jobs here than the Chinese could even think of. How many products have not been produced because of fear of lawsuits? How many extra steps are taken with products and services out of fear of lawsuits? Which industry has been specifically targeted by trial lawyers and which prompted an almost-succesful act of Congress to protect it? (hint: read any post on this forum).

Just like Wesley Clark, his best poll numbers came immediately after the announcement and it was downhill from there. Cheney is the best VP we have had, maybe ever, in terms of experience and judgement.

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 09:52 PM
CNN showed a poll today concerning negative feelings people had toward certain groups like trial lawyers, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, and big oil companies. Of all those, trial lawyers ranked lower (meaning better).

Don't live near Chapel Hill but I hear it's nice. My niece went their for her cleft palate surgery. Her daddy is a serious Tarheel fan.

The Rabbi
July 7, 2004, 09:54 PM
I lived there for two years.

I wouldnt believe any polling from the Communist News Network.

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 09:57 PM
Lemme guess, Fox and Rush?

The Rabbi
July 7, 2004, 10:06 PM
I dont watch TV but do listen to the radio. The only polling data I trust is the one the morning after election day, 'cause that's the only one worth anything.

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 10:22 PM
Gotta agree with that.

Enough folks here think the same that somehow Edwards beat the incumbent arch-consevative, Jesse Helms clone, Lauch Faircloth way back when.

jAK-47
July 7, 2004, 11:05 PM
Edwards looks like a sloppy kisser.

No wonder Massachusetts passed that gay marriage thing. Now Kerry and Edwards can share a room. It's a big bed so maybe they can invite Michael Moore-he can tape it. That's if Babs Streisand and friends can stop jumping up and down on the bed long enough to focus the camera. Of course that's IF Kerry wins...

Bush has made a lot of mistakes; he can really manage to look stupid, etc., but I don't think that Kerry will change one single thing that would have a positive affect on my life. On the other hand, Kerry may just make my GUN HOBBY more difficult to pursue.

Kerry won't or can't do anything to improve my life and he may ruin one of my hobbies. It's Bush (reluctantly) for me in the fall. I used to summer on the Vineyard and still visit but I don't remember Theresa putting me on her "A" list! And my Boston apartment isn't anywhere near Louisburg Square on Beacon Hill! And my place in Maine isn't anywhere near Walker's Point in Kennebunkport.

When it comes right down to it, most elected officials don't have anything in common with commoners; it's one of the main reasons for the mess we're in. They don't have a clue or just don't care.

Do you really think they have to skip having a medication refilled in order to eat or make the mortgage? Do they look out the window at 3pm because they're afraid their kids won't make it home from school? Kerry can't even keep the keys to his homes on the same keychain; he probably can't tell you all the complete addresses to all his (Theresa's) residences!

WHAT A FRIGGIN' JOKE! The Founding Fathers are tossing their cookies. "For the people, BUY the people..."

:cuss: jAK-47:cuss:

targetshootr
July 7, 2004, 11:40 PM
Gonna break the mood with a pic to show the stags I got off a Vaquero I bought at Cherry's yesterday. As good as they look, the gun (44 spl) shoots even better.


http://www.gunpix.com/gallery/Miscellaneous_and_Oddities/Im000809.jpg

fallingblock
July 8, 2004, 12:40 AM
Given the absolutely horrible senate voting record of Kerry when it comes to the Second Amendment,
if you plan on voting for him you better get what use out of them that you can now....:eek:

Cheney doesn't have Edwards' hair, it's true, but what else does Edwards have?

:confused:

DigMe
July 8, 2004, 01:01 AM
Wow, the hits just keep on coming.

"He likes me...he REALLY likes me!"

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=1105163

Lone_Gunman
July 8, 2004, 08:10 AM
How many products have not been produced because of fear of lawsuits?

Rabbi,

How about name a few of them for me?

CarlS
July 8, 2004, 08:39 AM
How about name a few of them for me?

Lone_Gunman.

Cessna quit producing light aircraft, the kind that the little guy could afford, years ago due to product liability. The 170 and 180 families were and are stable, very safe, easy to fly, forgiving aircraft. The suit I remember most was a private pilot who got drunk, went up in marginal weather, crashed and died. His widow successfully sued Cessna under product liability. There were a string of such suits against Cessna, Piper, Beechcraft, and Mooney. Today, no American company builds a small private aircraft. At least this was the case ten years ago when I quit flying. So there are four examples.

targetshootr
July 8, 2004, 09:12 AM
if you plan on voting for him you better get what use out of them that you can now....

Heck, we'll get to shoot guns like it's nobody's business. Only half-way around the world.


Cheney doesn't have Edwards' hair, it's true,what else does Edwards have?


He's more of a Tony Blair than a Darth Vader.

jAK-47
July 8, 2004, 10:14 AM
You can trust the government - just ask any Indian

Carl,

Bombay or Bangalore? :D Indians LOVE us - we're sending them thousands of jobs!

Due to the PC police, I think you mean "Native Americans". And because of our politicians' selling and ignoring our future, you had better teach your children/grandchildren Chinese - NOT SPANISH.

In about 20 years or less (unless we miraculously start voting for politicians who are not for sale to the highest bidder) China is going to take over as king of the hill. Of course we can always hope that THEIR politicians screw it up...

jAK-47

sumpnz
July 8, 2004, 02:38 PM
Today, no American company builds a small private aircraft. At least this was the case ten years ago when I quit flying. So there are four examples. Beechcraft never quit producing the Bonaza, and AFAIK the Baron too. In fact the Bonaza holds the record for the longest continuous production run ever for a general aviation aircraft. Cessna is producing 172's and 182's again. They've made some upgrades to the design, but nothing radical. Bare bones new 172's are selling for IIRC $170K but about 40% or 60% (can't remember which) is to cover their liability insurance premiums. Barons start at close $1million and Bonazas are around $400K for bare bones. Piper, last I heard, had been resurected and is producing again, as with Mooney.

I'm pretty much a "common man" but the 172 cost more than my house did when I bought it 3 years ago. I don't know of many people who could afford a 172 and a house. The suit I remember most was a private pilot who got drunk, went up in marginal weather, crashed and died. His widow successfully sued Cessna under product liability. Cessna also lost a suit when a widow sued claiming her hubby crashed becuase the plane was too difficult to fly. Pretty ironic when they also lost the suit above because the widow claimed the plane to easy to get up in the air becuase her drunk-off-his-butt husband was able to do so.

Most products are not terminated becuase of liability concerns. They just get a lot more expensive and come with all kinds of warnings and disclaimers.

Edit: A lot of products become more expensive becuase they either need to cover the insurance premium, or becuase of a costly re-design or more costly design in the first place that was used to aviod litigaition instead of cheaper design. That and things like my table saw come with that annoying guard on the blade that most people just take off becuase it's too much of a pain to actually use.

The Rabbi
July 8, 2004, 03:12 PM
By definition almost this is trying to prove a negative. How many products were killed before marketing because of liability concerns? I don't know. I would have had to be in on every conversation in every company in the US. I may be close to G-d, but not that close.
I do know when I was doing the mortgage business that we could offer products in TN that could not be offered in AL. One of the biggest sub-prime lenders, Ford, would not do business there because they paid $1M for recording an overnight fee on the wrong line of the HUD-1 Settlement Statement. Citizens in AL did not have access to the same credit that citizens in TN did.
If you're a doctor, try getting malpractice insurance for an OB/GYN in Birmingham. It either cant be done or it is cost prohibitive. Same thing in MS and other states. All of this is prompted by trial lawyers and their outrageous tactics.

fletcher
July 8, 2004, 03:17 PM
Kerry and Edwards are having a rally at my university this Saturday (very short-notice). Although I don't like either of their ideas, I may stop by and see how boring Kerry really is to listen to :p

CarlS
July 8, 2004, 07:10 PM
Bombay or Bangalore? Indians LOVE us - we're sending them thousands of jobs!

:D Uh, wrong continent! Wrong Indians. It's the political correct libs that came up with the "Native American" BS. Anyone born here is a native American. Most of us indigenous people of the US still refer to ourselves as "Indians", though, usually we refer to ourselves by tribe.

But I think we're off topic a little!

R.H. Lee
July 8, 2004, 10:22 PM
They can't keep their hands off each other!

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040708/capt.flco10407080408.kerry_flco104.jpg

DigMe
July 9, 2004, 12:28 AM
Kerry's really eyeing those lips here. He wants some more sloppy kissin'!!

http://img24.exs.cx/img24/1736/ILoveYouJohn.jpg

Off into the sunset...cue "Just the Two of Us" by Bill Withers:

http://img24.exs.cx/img24/5053/IntoTheSunset.jpg

brad cook

If you enjoyed reading about "Looks like its Edwards" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!